Roscini v. Roscini
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
-Judgment unanimously modified in accordance with Memorandum, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The decretal paragraph providing for the wife’s support included a direction that the defendant “pay as additional alimony 12.5 percent of any bonus or additional compensation be may receive in a lump sum ”. This provision should be deleted for the reasons set forth in our decision in Tedrow v. Tedrow (36 A D 2d 686). “ A wife is not entitled to a share of her husband’s income as such nor is there a right to escalation as the husband- prospers but she must have minimum support”…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Karlin v. KarlinNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hunter v. HunterIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986
- Goldin v. GoldinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- McClusky v. McCluskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Provenzano v. ProvenzanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Dunning v. DunningNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.