AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

JOHN R. MORKEN, RESPONDENT, v. SABRINA L. MORKEN, APPELLANT.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

An evaluation of what constitutes reasonable counsel fees is a matter that is generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court (see, DeCabrera v. Cabrera-Rosete, 70 N.Y.2d 879, 881; Pena v. Pena, 255 A.D.2d 498; Matter of Bailey, Marshall Hoeniger v. Merzon, 210 A.D.2d 474), which is often in the best position to judge those factors integral to the fixing of counsel fees (see, Pauk v. Pauk, 232 A.D.2d 386; O'Neil v. O'Neil, 193 A.D.2d 16, 20; Levine v. Levine, 179 A.D.2d 625, 626). The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in awarding an attorney's fee in this case.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MORKEN v. MORKEN
(Mar 11, 2002)