16 Cited authorities

  1. Pell v. Board of Education

    34 N.Y.2d 222 (N.Y. 1974)   Cited 5,554 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Discussing the standard of review in an Article 78 appeal
  2. Majauskas v. Majauskas

    61 N.Y.2d 481 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 585 times
    Holding that vested rights in a noncontributory pension plan are marital property to the extent they were acquired between the date of marriage and commencement of a matrimonial action
  3. In Matter of Ridge Road Fire Dist. v. Schiano

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 2720 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 69 times

    No. 55. Argued February 16, 2011. Decided April 5, 2011 APPEAL, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, entered November 13, 2009. The Appellate Division (1) reversed, on the law, a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Evelyn Frazee, J.), entered in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which had (a) granted the petition seeking to annul the determination of respondent Michael

  4. Dolan v. Dolan

    78 N.Y.2d 463 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 59 times
    Holding that disability pension was marital property only to the extent it compensated for length of service of employment and represented deferred compensation
  5. Berardi v. Berardi

    54 A.D.3d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 19 times
    In Berardi, this Court interpreted a stipulation of settlement of a divorce action which contained similarly broad language as that contained in the instant stipulation. It provided for equal distribution of the husband's “pension” and “disability payment,” without differentiating between the separate-property portion of any disability pension, and the portion representing deferred compensation.
  6. In re Disidoro

    81 A.D.3d 1228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)   Cited 15 times

    No. 510170. February 24, 2011. Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Tompkins County (Rowley, J.), entered March 10, 2010, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 4, to direct respondent to pay child and spousal support. Danny T. Disidoro, Spencer, appellant pro se. Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Malone Jr. and McCarthy, JJ. Spain, J. The parties are the parents of two children, born in 1998 and 2003; they married in 2005 and began living apart

  7. Heck vs. Keane

    6 A.D.3d 95 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 21 times

    CA 03-01496. Decided March 19, 2004. Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John F. O'Donnell, J.), entered September 27, 2002 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment granted the petition. Michael B. Risman, Corporation Counsel, Buffalo (Christopher M. Putrino of counsel), for appellants. Richard H. Wyssling, Buffalo, for respondent. PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, WISNER, HURLBUTT, AND GORSKI, JJ. OPINION AND ORDER HURLBUTT, J. The threshold

  8. Matter of Cook v. City of Utica

    88 N.Y.2d 833 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 17 times

    Argued March 28, 1996 Decided April 30, 1996 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department. Roemer, Wallens Mineaux, L.L.P., Albany (James W. Roemer of counsel), and Joseph H. Hobika, Corporation Counsel of City of Utica, Utica (Charles N. Brown of counsel), for appellants. Ainsworth, Sullivan, Tracy, Knauf, Warner Ruslander, P.C., Albany (Mary Beth Hynes of counsel), for respondent. Donna M.C. Gilberto, Albany, for New York State Conference of Mayors and

  9. McNelis v. McNelis

    6 A.D.3d 673 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 7 times

    2002-09335. Decided April 26, 2004. In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), dated September 9, 2002, which, upon his default in answering the complaint and upon an inquest on ancillary economic issues, inter alia, granted the plaintiff wife a divorce, awarded her a 50% share of his pension, and directed him to pay the plaintiff an attorney's

  10. Solano v. Vernon

    49 A.D.3d 762 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 3 times

    No. 2007-05736. March 18, 2008. In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition to prohibit the respondents from conducting any administrative proceedings in connection with the issue of whether the petitioner is permanently disabled, in the nature of mandamus to compel the City of Mount Vernon to award the petitioner benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-a (2) and, in effect, to review a determination of the City of Mount Vernon Fire Department dated November 17, 2006

  11. Section 236 - Special controlling provisions; prior actions or proceedings; new actions or proceedings

    N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236   Cited 3,612 times
    Discussing the considerations for calculating the equitable distribution