GALLANT v. GALLANT

The record supports the trial court's finding on remand ( 197 A.D.2d 422) that defendant effectively abandoned the marital residence for the purposes intended in the parties' divorce judgment, and that its sale should therefore not await the year 2000 as contemplated in the judgment. However, in discounting plaintiff's share of the proceeds of the sale in order to adjust for the accelerated sale, the trial court failed to take into account relevant factors such as, with respect to plaintiff's $15,000 initial capital investment that was to be returned to him, dollar for dollar, the loss of interest that could have been earned during the term of defendant's exclusive occupancy, and, with respect to plaintiff's originally assigned 85% share of the net proceeds, the potentially appreciated value of the apartment by the year 2000 or its depreciated value since entry of the judgment. In the absence of expert testimony on these and other factors possibly relevant to valuation, it does not appear that the discounting formula applied by the trial court results in an equitable distribution.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ross, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.