L'Esperance v. L'Esperance
| Citation | 663 N.Y.S.2d 95,243 A.D.2d 446 |
| Parties | , 1997 N.Y. Slip Op. 8069 Lucille B. L'ESPERANCE, Respondent-Appellant, v. Richard C. L'ESPERANCE, Appellant-Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 06 October 1997 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Tippins & Cornaire, LLP, Troy (Timothy M. Tippins, of counsel), for appellant-respondent.
Michael D. Shilensky, Roslyn Heights, for respondent-appellant.
Before MANGANO, P.J., and ROSENBLATT, PIZZUTO and LUCIANO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Goldstein, J.), dated January 26, 1996, which, inter alia, after a nonjury trial, awarded the plaintiff wife 40% of the value of his share of a business, denied his request for certain financial credits with regard to the marital residence, and awarded the wife all of the contested jewelry. The plaintiff wife cross-appeals from stated portions of the same judgment which, inter alia, found the value of the husband's business to be $1,950,000 and awarded her only a 40% distribution of the value of his share in that business, denied her requests for certain financial credits with regard to the marital residence, and limited the award of maintenance to $1,500 per month for a 10-year period.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the husband's contentions, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the trial court to rely upon the opinion of the wife's expert regarding the value of his business. In a nonjury trial, evaluating the credibility of the respective witnesses and determining which of the proffered items of evidence are most credible are matters committed to the trial court's sound discretion (see, Dempster v. Dempster, 236 A.D.2d 582, 654 N.Y.S.2d 653; Matter of Adirondack Hydro Dev. Corp. [Warrensburg Bd. & Paper Corp.], 205 A.D.2d 925, 926, 613 N.Y.S.2d 459). There is no uniform rule for fixing the value of a going business for the purpose of equitable distribution. Valuation is an exercise properly within the fact-finding power of the trial courts, guided by expert testimony (see, Burns v. Burns, 84 N.Y.2d 369, 375, 618 N.Y.S.2d 761, 643 N.E.2d 80; Miness v. Miness, 229 A.D.2d 520, 645 N.Y.S.2d 838). The determination of the fact-finder as to the value of a business, if within the range of the testimony presented, will not be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rosenstock v. Rosenstock
...credible are matters committed to the trial court's sound discretion" (Ivani v. Ivani, 303 A.D.2d 639 [2003], citing L'Esperance v. L'Esperance, 243 A.D.2d 446 [1997] ; accord Krutyansky v. Krutyansky, 289 A.D.2d 299 [2001] ; Diaco, 278 A.D.2d at 359, 717 N.Y.S.2d 635 ; Solomon v. Solomon, ......
-
Hackett v. Hackett, 3338/2008.
...credible are matters committed to the trial court's sound discretion” (Ivani v. Ivani, 303 A.D.2d 639, 640 [2003],citing L'Esperance v. L'Esperance, 243 A.D.2d 446 [1997];accord Krutyansky v. Krutyansky, 289 A.D.2d 299, 299–300 [2001] ).Mutual Mistake Initially, the court notes that “[s]tip......
-
Brown v. BK 418 LLC
...117 [2 Dept., 2010], quoting Ivani v. Ivani, 303 A.D.2d 639, 757 N.Y.S.2d 89 [2 Dept., 2003], quoting L'Esperance v. L'Esperance, 243 A.D.2d 446, 663 N.Y.S.2d 95 [2 Dept., 1997]).The credibility of the witnesses, the reconciliation of conflicting statements, a determination of which should ......
-
Mojdeh M. v. Jamshid A.
...117 [2 Dept.,2010], quoting Ivani v. Ivani, 303 A.D.2d 639, 757 N.Y.S.2d 89 [2 Dept.,2003], quoting L'Esperance v. L'Esperance, 243 A.D.2d 446, 663 N.Y.S.2d 95 [2 Dept.,1997]; see also Schwartz v. Schwartz, 67 A.D.3d 989, 890 N.Y.S.2d 71 [2 Dept.,2009]; Krutyansky v. Krutyansky, 289 A.D.2d ......