Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Turret v. Turret 147 A.D.3d 467

← Cases

Turret v. Turret

147 A.D.3d 467 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 2017-02-07 English

Judges Concur — Friedman, J.R, Andrias, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

Contents

Majority

p. 467
David Turret, Appellant, v Nancy Turret, Respondent.
[46 NYS3d 598]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank P. Ñervo, J.), entered February 16, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant wife’s application for interim monthly maintenance in the amount of $11,564.78, tax-free, and $175,000 in interim counsel fees from plaintiff husband, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly applied the formula set forth in Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (5-a) in calculating the award of temporary spousal maintenance to the wife. In determining

p. 468
an upward departure from the presumptive amount was appropriate, the court relied upon two of the enumerated factors set forth in Domestic Relations Law § 236 (5-a) (h) (1), the substantial differences in the incomes of the parties and the standard of living of the parties established during the marriage. The court also explained its deviation from the presumptive guidelines award in its decision (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [5-a] [d] [3]). Under the circumstances “the amount awarded is a proper accommodation between the reasonable needs of [the wife] and the financial ability of [the husband], while taking into consideration the pre-separation standard of living” (Brown v Brown, 123 AD3d 596 , 596 [1st Dept 2014]).

The court also providently exercised its discretion in awarding the wife $175,000 in counsel fees, pendente lite, upon its determination that the husband was in a better position to bear the cost of her legal fees at that time under Domestic Relations Law § 237 (Bricker v Powers, 208 AD2d 463 [1st Dept 1994]). Regardless, it is “well settled that a speedy trial is plaintiff’s proper remedy in this situation” (id. at 463).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Friedman, J.R, Andrias, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited