- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
MOSTEL v. MOSTEL
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Mar 16, 2006
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.
We modify as above indicated as the statute requires that investment income be reduced by sums expended in connection therewith (Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [b] [5] [ii]). Defendant's 2003 tax return shows $15,489 of expenses in connection with $4,636 of investment income from 331 Investors, LLC, but the motion court, which otherwise relied on this tax return in determining defendant's income, did not subtract the $15,489. The motion court's use of income above the $80,000 cap was properly based on the large financial disparity between the parties and the family's preseparation standard of living ( see Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [f] [3], [7]). We have considered and rejected defendant's other arguments.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.