Court Opinion

ID: 5840033
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 22:51:40.394273+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:44.022820
License: Public Domain

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the Family Court did not err in denying her motion pursuant to Family Court Act § 842 (f) for an award of counsel fees in the sum of $5,413.50 on the ground that the respondent is the financially superior spouse (see Family Ct Act § 842 [f]; see also Matter of Amy Cohen L. v Howard N.L., 222 AD2d 677 [1995]; Merola v Merola, 146 AD2d 611, 612 [1989]; Matter of Leffingwell v Leffingwell, 86 AD2d 929, 930 [1982]; cf. Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a], [b]; § 238; Family Ct Act § 438 [a]; §§ 536, 641; Cohen v Cohen, 73 AD3d 832, 834 [2010]), or based on his failure to submit a statement of net worth and related papers as part of his opposition to the motion (cf. 22 NYCRR 202.16 [a], [k] [2], [4]; Domestic Relations Law § 237 [a], [b]; § 236 [A] [2]; [B] [4] [a]). Dillon, J.E, Eng, Austin and Miller, JJ, concur.