Case Name: Eugene Litman, Appellant, v. Phyllis Litman, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1984-03-20
Citations: 61 N.Y.2d 918
Docket Number: 
Parties: Eugene Litman, Appellant, v Phyllis Litman, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 61
Pages: 918–920

Head Matter:
Eugene Litman, Appellant, v Phyllis Litman, Respondent.
Argued February 17, 1984;
decided March 20, 1984
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Kathy Solerwitz and Barbara Simon for appellant.
Kenneth J. Weinstein and Richard C. Goldberg for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirmative for the reasons stated in the Per Curiam opinion at the Appellate Division (93 AD2d 695). We cannot say that the expert opinion with respect to the economic value of the plaintiff's law practice would not be of assistance in fashioning a distributive award under the statute.
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye.