Sklan v. Sklan
| Decision Date | 19 December 1967 |
| Citation | 29 A.D.2d 526,285 N.Y.S.2d 367 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | Freda SKLAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Harold SKLAN, Defendant-Respondent. |
L. Guzik, New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.
S. Panish, New York City, for defendant-respondent.
Before BOTEIN, P.J., and STEVENS, EAGER, STEUER and McNALLY, JJ.
The order of September 11, 1967, holding the application for temporary alimony and counsel fee in abeyance pending the determination of the issue of jurisdiction, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements.
In view of the disposition of the companion appeal vacating the order of reference on the issue of jurisdiction, we deem it appropriate to fix temporary alimony. Temporary alimony is fixed at the sum of $135 a week, to include rent and tuition for the issue of the marriage. We deem it preferable to provide for a specific dollar award of temporary alimony and support rather than directing the payment of categories of support which may be subject to increase beyond the amount contemplated by the Court. The award of temporary alimony and support is not determinative of the permanent alimony and support which will be governed by the evidence adduced at the trial. See Schine v. Schine, 28 A.D.2d 976, 283 N.Y.S.2d 287, 1967.
Counsel fee is allowed in the sum of $1,000, without prejudice to an application to the trial court for additional counsel fee. One-half of said counsel fee is to be paid within 20 days after entry of an order hereon, the balance when the case first appears on the day calendar.
Order, entered August 18, 1967, referring the issue of jurisdiction to a special referee, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, and the reference vacated, without costs or disbursements, with leave to defendant to amend his answer to plead the defense of lack of jurisdiction. The jurisdictional issue, if pleaded by way of defense, is directed to be tried first. This procedure will avoid circuity. See Cardy v. Cardy, 14 A.D.2d 735, 220 N.Y.S.2d 99.
Appeal from order, entered September 11, 1967, denying motion to reargue, dismissed as non-appealable, without costs or disbursements. (Kleinert v. Gabel, 18 A.D.2d 990, Case No. 3, 238 N.Y.S.2d 587; In the Matter of the Dissolution of Dalminter, Inc., 23 A.D.2d 749, 750, Case No. 2, 258 N.Y.S.2d 954, 955; United Artists Television, Inc. v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Millner v. Millner
...citing Schine v. Schine, 28 A.D.2d 976, 283 N.Y.S.2d 287; Macris v. Macris, 29 A.D.2d 528, 285 N.Y.S.2d 304; and Sklan v. Sklan, 29 A.D.2d 526, 285 N.Y.S.2d 367. To this group may be added Furst v. Furst, 30 A.D.2d 955, 294 N.Y.S.2d What the circumstances are that might warrant a 'different......
-
Fomenko v. Fomenko
...determinations upon testimonial and other trial evidence (if not stipulated) of the financial condition of the parties (Sklan v. Sklan, 29 A.D.2d 526, 285 N.Y.S.2d 367, and see cases last above The record does not permit us to substitute our judgment for that of the trial court as to the am......
-
Grenader v. Lefkowitz
...6, 1974, to the extent that it denied reargument, should be dismissed as non-appealable without costs or disbursements (Sklan v. Sklan, 29 A.D.2d 526, 285 N.Y.S.2d 367). Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on September 11, 1974, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of ......
-
American Bank & Trust Co. v. Lichtenstein
...1974, denying plaintiff's motion for reargument unanimously dismissed as non-appealable, without costs or disbursements (Sklan v. Sklan, 29 A.D.2d 526, 285 N.Y.S.2d 367; United Artists Television v. Quality Bakers of America Co-op, 27 A.D.2d 651, 276 N.Y.S.2d During the period of 1967 throu......