Barton v. Barton
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Citation | 137 A.D.3d 723,27 N.Y.S.3d 572 |
| Parties | Deborah BARTON, respondent, v. Lawrence BARTON, appellant. |
| Decision Date | 02 March 2016 |
137 A.D.3d 723
27 N.Y.S.3d 572
Deborah BARTON, respondent,
v.
Lawrence BARTON, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
March 2, 2016.
Karla S. George, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Gordon A. Burrows, White Plains, N.Y. (Julie Hyman of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, and HECTOR D. LaSALLE, JJ.
Appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Janet C. Malone, J.), entered July 16, 2014, and (2) an amended order of that court entered July 22, 2014. The amended order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to hold the defendant in contempt for failure to comply with the parties' settlement agreement dated April 2, 2010, and denied those branches of the defendant's cross motion which were for a downward modification of his maintenance obligations and for an award of child support.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered July 16, 2014, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the amended order entered July 22, 2014; and it is further,
ORDERED that the amended order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.
The parties were married in 1987, and they separated in 2006. On April 2, 2010, they entered into a settlement agreement to resolve, inter alia, the issues of maintenance, child support, and equitable distribution. The settlement agreement was incorporated, but not merged, into the parties' judgment of divorce. Pursuant to the agreement, the defendant agreed to make certain payments to the plaintiff. He failed to do so, and the plaintiff moved, inter alia, to hold the defendant in contempt. The defendant cross-moved, among other things, for a downward modification of his maintenance obligations and for an award of child support. The Supreme Court, inter alia, granted the subject branch of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mage v. Mage, 2016–03943
...v. El–Dehdan, 26 N.Y.3d 19, 19 N.Y.S.3d 475, 41 N.E.3d 340 ; Spencer v. Spencer, 159 A.D.3d 174, 71 N.Y.S.3d 154 ; Barton v. Barton, 137 A.D.3d 723, 27 N.Y.S.3d 572 ; Townes v. Coker, 134 A.D.3d 805, 21 N.Y.S.3d 314 ). We also agree with the court's determination that the plaintiff did not ......
-
S.M.S. v. D.S.
...to the Court's analysis, a full evidentiary hearing was not required before rendering this Decision and Order. SeeBarton v. Barton, 137 A.D.3d 723, 27 N.Y.S.3d 572 (2d Dept.2016).Procedural HistoryDue to the unique nature of the current proceeding, the Court finds that a brief history of th......
-
Yin v. Qiao, 2021–00733
...she failed to attach a statement of net worth to her motion papers (see 22 NYCRR 202.16 [k][2]; 161 N.Y.S.3d 847 Barton v. Barton, 137 A.D.3d 723, 724, 27 N.Y.S.3d 572 ).However, the Supreme Court erred in granting the defendant's cross motion pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130–1.1 to impose sanction......
-
Zephirin v. Pierre-Louis
...which was to appoint a receiver to sell that real property (see CPLR 5106 ; 35 N.Y.S.3d 235 Foley v. Gootenberg, 137 A.D.3d at 745, 27 N.Y.S.3d 572 ; Lutz v. Goldstone, 42 A.D.3d 561, 563, 840 N.Y.S.2d 620...