Rosenshein v. Rosenshein

Full title: HELENE M. ROSENSHEIN, Respondent, v. ARNOLD ROSENSHEIN, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 10, 1995

211 A.D.2d 456 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

620 N.Y.S.2d 383

Opinion

January 10, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis R. Friedman, J.).

The court is empowered to protect marital assets for equitable distribution (Domestic Relations Law § 234), and thus properly required defendant to post the escrow based upon the documentation provided of property mismanagement. The record also contains sufficient evidence to support the appointment of the receiver to preserve the marital assets and avoid their dissipation (see, Peters v. Peters, 127 A.D.2d 575), especially since defendant had agreed to the sale of all the real estate holdings. We have considered defendant's other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.