AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
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
Attorney(S)

MICHAEL MENASHI, APPELLANT, v. PAMELA G. MENASHI, RESPONDENT.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The proper remedy for any perceived inequities in a pendente lite award is a speedy trial (see, Tillinger v. Tillinger, 141 A.D.2d 535, 536; see also, Frankenbach v. Frankenbach, 244 A.D.2d 524; Walker v. Walker, 193 A.D.2d 730). An appellate court will rarely modify such an award, "and then only under exigent circumstances such as where a party is unable to meet his or her financial obligations or justice otherwise requires" (Bagner v. Bagner, 207 A.D.2d 367, 368). The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that such circumstances exist. Accordingly, modification of the award is not warranted.

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MENASHI v. MENASHI
(Mar 19, 2001)