Pap v. Pap

Decision Date25 March 1976
PartiesBarbara PAP, Respondent, v. Leo PAP, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Edward R. Sullivan, New York City, for appellant.

Noel Tepper, Poughkeepsie, for respondent.

Before KOREMAN, P.J., and SWEENEY, MAHONEY, LARKIN and HERLIHY, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Ulster County, entered March 13, 1974, which directed the appellant to pay to petitioner the amount of $400 per month for support for a period of one year following the entry of the order and further directed the appellant to pay to the attorney for the petitioner counsel fees in the sum of $1,000.

The petitioner was granted a divorce from the appellant by the Supreme Court, Ulster County, in a decree dated June 29, 1972. The decree provided that the appellant 'shall not be required to support the (petitioner)'. At Special Term, January 5, 1973, petitioner moved for an order modifying the divorce decree to provide for alimony and counsel fees for the proceeding. Special Term determined that, pursuant to section 236 of the Domestic Relations Law, it had the power to grant the relief sought and that, pursuant to section 464 of the Family Court Act, it had the authority to refer to that court the application for permanent support. The matter was referred to the Family Court of Ulster County or the Family Court of such other county having appropriate jurisdiction. The order referring the case was dated March 17, 1973. No appeal was taken from that order. Thereafter, the Family Court of Ulster County rendered a decision dated January 31, 1974 upon which the order appealed from was entered.

At the outset, it is noted that the order appealed from has been complied with and restitution of payments made is not sought. While it is contended by the petitioner that these facts render this appeal moot, we conclude that a determination should be made to put at rest the question of whether petitioner may make applications in the future to compel appellant to make support payments to her.

Section 236 of the Domestic Relations Law provides, in part:

In any action * * * for a divorce, the court may direct the husband to provide suitably for the support of the wife * * *. Upon the application of either the husband or the wife, upon such notice to the other party and given in such manner as the court shall direct, the court may annul or modify any such direction, whether made by order or by final judgment, or In case no such direction shall have been made in the final judgment may, with respect to any judgment of * * * divorce whenever rendered, amend the judgment by inserting such direction. (Emphasis supplied.)

The effect of section 236 is a clear reservation of jurisdiction in every matrimonial judgment to assure the power of the court to modify alimony directions (from time to time), whether they...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Mebert v. Mebert
    • United States
    • New York Family Court
    • 10 Noviembre 1981
    ...other party as the court shall direct, Supreme Court may modify any previous custody order it has rendered. Cf.: Pap v. Pap, 51 A.D.2d 1091, 381 N.Y.S.2d 542 (3d Dept.1976). Thus, in New York, the Supreme Court has continuing jurisdiction over divorce decrees, and the Family Court sits with......
  • Goodell v. Goodell
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 3 Julio 1980
    ...the support provisions of a divorce decree upon a proper showing of changed circumstances even by a post-judgment order (Pap v. Pap, 51 A.D.2d 1091, 381 N.Y.S.2d 542). Accordingly, the order of the Family Court should be Order affirmed, with costs. 1 Section 236 of the Domestic Relations La......
  • Emily K. v. Matthew K.
    • United States
    • New York Family Court
    • 5 Agosto 1983
    ...has jurisdiction to make an initial award of alimony post-decree with the same powers possessed by the Supreme Court. Pap v. Pap, 51 A.D.2d 1091, 381 N.Y.S.2d 542, 3rd Dept. In the instant matter, the divorce decree declares that the Supreme Court retains jurisdiction of the matter, concurr......
  • Sergi v. Sergi
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 16 Junio 1977
    ...has the power pursuant to section 464 (subd. (a)) of the Family Court Act to refer alimony applications to Family Court (Pap v. Pap, 51 A.D.2d 1091, 381 N.Y.S.2d 542). In the absence of an order of referral from the Supreme Court, the Family Court in the present case could only make directi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT