Legal Opinion
Reddan v. Reddan
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 7, 2012PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to award the plaintiff maintenance (see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a]; Dellafiora v Dellafiora, 38 AD3d 825, 826 [2007]; Almeda v Hopper, 2 AD3d 471 [2003]; Mica v Mica, 275 AD2d 765, 766 [2000]; Kraeger v Kraeger, 271 AD2d 657 [2000]).
Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court properly denied her request for a credit for her purported separate property contribution to improvements made to the mari*666tal residence (see Traut v Traut, 181 AD2d 671, 672 [1992]). The determination as to whether separate…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Prichep v. PrichepAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Mica v. MicaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Schek v. SchekAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Dellafiora v. DellafioraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Almeda v. HopperAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Nicodemus v. NicodemusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Nicodemus v. NicodemusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012