From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Monier v. Monier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 18, 2005
20 A.D.3d 537 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2005-00775.

July 18, 2005.

In a support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (McElrath, J.), dated December 15, 2004, which denied his objections to stated portions of an order of the same court (Castaldi, S.M.) dated July 8, 2004, based upon supplemental findings of fact dated November 22, 2004, which, inter alia, directed him to pay 50% of the monthly mortgage expense of the marital residence.

Philip Monier III, Staten Island, N.Y., appellant pro se.

Catherine Ann Monier, Staten Island, N.Y., respondent pro se.

Before: Prudenti, P.J., Goldstein, Crane and Mastro, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant contends that the directive that he pay 50% of the monthly mortgage expense of the marital residence, which is jointly owned by the parties, is in violation of the parties' prenuptial agreement which waived spousal support. On the contrary, the mortgage constitutes a joint obligation of the parties acquired during the marriage ( see Rubin v. Rubin, 262 AD2d 390, 391). As noted by the Support Magistrate in her supplemental findings of fact, it is "appropriate to award 50% of the monthly mortgage expense in an effort to preserve the marital asset, and most significantly, to maintain the home and the standard of living" of the three minor children of the marriage.


Summaries of

Monier v. Monier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 18, 2005
20 A.D.3d 537 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Monier v. Monier

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CATHERINE A. MONIER, Respondent, v. PHILIP MONIER III…

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

Date published: Jul 18, 2005

Citations

20 A.D.3d 537 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
800 N.Y.S.2d 426

Citing Cases

Loria v. Loria

Moreover, as the Supreme Court properly found, the plaintiffs separate funds used for the improvement of the…