Legal Opinion
Wandell v. Wandell
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 9, 1988PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
As a general rule, broad financial disclosure should be denied unless and until an existing separation agreement between the parties which controls their respective support obligations and the distribution of property is set aside (see, Weinstock v Weinstock, 122 AD2d 790; Potvin v Potvin, 92 AD2d 562, 563; see also, McLean v Balkoski, 125 AD2d 234, 235). Because the validity of the separation agreement must be determined as a threshold matter prior to granting a broad right of disclosure, the award of professional fees to permit the plaintiff to evaluate the matters subject to financial…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ahern v. AhernAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Potvin v. PotvinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Gastineau v. GastineauAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- McLean v. BalkoskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Weinstock v. WeinstockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
3Cited by5 opinions
- Garguilio v. GarguilioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Fischman v. FischmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- DeSantis v. DeSantisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Ravel v. RavelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Pincus v. LipsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010