Legal Opinion
Shurka v. Shurka
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 8, 2009PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The award of temporary maintenance is amply supported by the evidence demonstrating defendant’s financial need, the parties’ income and assets, and their previous standard" of living *489(see Ritter v Ritter, 135 AD2d 421, 422 [1987]). The undisputed evidence that the parties enjoyed a lavish marital lifestyle, as well as the evidence that substantial personal expenses were paid by the family-controlled business, supports the court’s conclusion that plaintiffs actual income and financial resources were substantially greater than he reported in tax returns and financial statements (see Wildenstein…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Charpié v. CharpiéAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Ritter v. RitterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Wildenstein v. WildensteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Gellman v. GellmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Jose R. D. v. Elisabeth R. D.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Coven v. CovenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Arabian v. ArabianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Gahagan v. GahaganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010