Legal Opinion

Wood v. Wood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 31, 1998PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Upon consideration of plaintiffs “reasonable needs and predivorce standard of living in the context of the enumerated statutory factors * * * (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a] [1]-[11])” (Hartog v Hartog, 85 NY2d 36, 52), we conclude that Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in awarding plaintiff maintenance of $400 biweekly until defendant’s retirement (see, Boughton v Boughton, 239 AD2d 935). The court, however, should have awarded maintenance…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hartog v. HartogNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Boughton v. BoughtonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. DiSanto v. DiSantoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  4. Lester v. LesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bailey v. BaileyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
  2. Bennett v. BennettAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  3. Roehmholdt v. RussellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  4. Zielinski v. ZielinskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API