Auriemmo v. Auriemmo
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*1091“The trial court ‘is vested with broad discretion in making an equitable distribution of marital property’ (Bossard v Bossard, 199 AD2d 971, 971 [1993]), and unless it can be shown that the court improvidently exercised that discretion, its determination should not be disturbed” (Saleh v Saleh, 40 AD3d 617, 617-618 [2007]). “Equitable distribution does not necessarily mean equal distribution” (Michaelessi v Michaelessi, 59 AD3d 688, 689 [2009] ; see McLoughlin v McLoughlin, 74 AD3d 911, 914 [2010] ). Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in awarding the plaintiff 45% of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bray v. CoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Rubeo v. National Grange Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- Saleh v. SalehAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Bernholc v. BornsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Bossard v. BossardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lago v. AdrionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. PosnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Cornish v. Eraca-CornishAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Luburic v. Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Catalanotto v. AbrahamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.