Case ID: ad2d_225/html/0575-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John Costin, Respondent, v Dolores Costin, Appellant.
    [638 NYS2d 786]
   Bifurcation of matrimonial actions is generally disfavored because it raises the possibilities of economic coercion, two protracted proceedings, or delay in resolving the financial issues (Campbell v Campbell, 171 AD2d 720; Fiorella v Fiorella, 132 AD2d 643). Absent concrete reasons for bifurcation, such a motion should be denied (see, Campbell v Campbell, supra, at 721). Here, the only reason the plaintiff offers is that the grounds phase would progress quickly and the equitable distribution phase would be more complicated. Such a reason does not warrant bifurcation and could well lead to a delay in resolving the financial issues. Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Thompson and Hart, JJ., concur.