Kunerth v. Kunerth

• Decision Date: 12 July 1977
• Parties: Donna Lee KUNERTH, Appellant v. Alan Miller KUNERTH, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 39

397 N.Y.S.2d 39

58 A.D.2d 1010

Donna Lee KUNERTH, Appellant v. Alan Miller KUNERTH, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 12, 1977.

Sheldon M. Markel, Buffalo, for appellant.

Offerman, Fallon, Mahoney & Cassano, Leo J. Fallon, Buffalo, for respondent.

Before MOULE, J. P., and CARDAMONE, HANCOCK, DENMAN and WITMER, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

On this appeal from an Order awarding temporary alimony, and containing other provisions, plaintiff requests that we increase the award of $150 per week for her and her 18-year old son and that we reverse the directive that she return to defendant a 1974 Mercedes-Benz automobile upon defendant delivering to her "a certain 1975 Fiat automobile". The Mercedes-Benz is registered in the name of one of defendant's operating corporations.

As we have so often written, parties to a matrimonial action should not waste their assets and the court's time seeking review of an order for temporary alimony. The best relief is a speedy trial, and nothing in this case justifies departure from this rule. Indeed, this appeal has unnecessarily delayed for nearly a year the trial disposition of this case (see Vesper v. Vesper, 46 A.D.2d 729, 359 N.Y.S.2d 1009; Schoellkopf v. Schoellkopf, 41 A.D.2d 599, 340 N.Y.S.2d 348; Gelow v. Gelow, 41 A.D.2d 556, 339 N.Y.S.2d 781; Dobbin v. Dobbin, 39 A.D.2d 836, 333 N.Y.S.2d 154; Frost v. Frost, 38 A.D.2d 786, 328 N.Y.S.2d 77; DeGasper v. DeGasper, 31 A.D.2d 886, 298 N.Y.S.2d 297).

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.