Renga v. Renga
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*635The relevant facts are set forth in a related appeal (see Renga v Renga, 86 AD3d 632 [2011] [decided herewith]).
An appellate court should rarely modify a pendente lite award, and then “ ‘only under exigent circumstances, such as where a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations, or justice otherwise requires’ ” (Malik v Malik, 66 AD3d 968, 968 [2009], quoting Levakis v Levakis, 7 AD3d 678, 678 [2004]; see Silver v Silver, 46 AD3d 667, 668 [2007]; Fruchter v Fruchter, 29 AD3d 942, 944 [2006]). Further, pendente lite awards “should be an accommodation between the reasonable needs…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- O'Shea v. O'SheaNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- Byer v. ByerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Fruchter v. FruchterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Levakis v. LevakisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Conyea v. ConyeaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Truglia v. TrugliaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Abramson v. GavaresAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Johnson v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Stock v. StockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Chusid v. SilveraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.