From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Devivo v. Devivo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 8, 2003
2 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-10752.

Decided December 8, 2003.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McNulty, J.), dated October 29, 2002, as granted the plaintiff's motion for counsel fees in the sum of $45,746.21 and pendente lite arrears in the sum of $18,975.42, and as failed to decide that branch of his cross motion which was for reimbursement of $16,000 he paid pursuant to two pendente lite orders of the same court.

Robert E. Tate, for appellant.

Tabat, Cohen Blum, LLP, (Michelle J. Pessah of counsel), for respondent.

Before: ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order as failed to decide that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was for reimbursement of $16,000 is dismissed, as that branch of the cross motion remains pending and undecided ( see Katz v. Katz, 68 A.D.2d 536); and it is further,

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from and reviewed; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.

The defendant's contention that the award of counsel fees was erroneous because it was based on inadmissible hearsay evidence is without merit. The parties waived their right to a hearing on the issue of counsel fees, consented to resolve the issue upon motion papers and submissions, and the plaintiff's attorneys carefully documented each of the charges listed in their respective affirmations of services rendered ( see Pinto v. Pinto, 260 A.D.2d 622; Robinson v. Robinson, 166 A.D.2d 428; cf. Covington v. Covington, 249 A.D.2d 735).

The defendant's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

McGINITY, J.P., LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Devivo v. Devivo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 8, 2003
2 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Devivo v. Devivo

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA ANN DEVIVO, respondent, v. DENNIS JAMES DEVIVO, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 8, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
767 N.Y.S.2d 892

Citing Cases

Valdivia v. Consol. Resistance

"A party should be afforded a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery prior to the determination of a…

Thoma v. Thoma

However, the Supreme Court was required to determine the plaintiff's share of such expenses by prorating his…