CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sandhu v. Sandhu

Justice Weinstein dissents in part and concurs in part regarding a divorce judgment. The memorandum argues that the evidence presented by the plaintiff husband for cruel and inhuman treatment was insufficient to warrant a divorce in his favor, especially considering the 15-year marriage, the wife's financial dependency, and acts of provocation by the husband and his mother. Conversely, the justice finds that the defendant wife presented sufficient evidence of the husband's cruel and inhuman treatment, including physical assaults and verbal abuse, entitling her to a divorce on her counterclaim. The memorandum recommends modifying the judgment to grant the wife's counterclaim for divorce and remitting the matter for alimony proceedings. It concurs with the trial court's decision to award custody of the three minor children to the husband, based on a psychiatric social worker's recommendation and the children's expressed preference, while ensuring liberal visitation rights for the wife.

DivorceCruel and Inhuman TreatmentAlimonyChild CustodyDomestic Relations LawMarital MisconductProvocationAppellate ReviewSpousal SupportLong-Term Marriage
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 18, 1990

Wilson v. Wilson

In an appeal concerning a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant wife challenged the Supreme Court, Suffolk County's judgment regarding maintenance, child support, and marital property division. The appellate court found the initial five-year maintenance award for a 17-year marriage to be an improvident exercise of discretion, particularly given the defendant's inability to reenter the job market immediately due to child custody and the need for further training. Consequently, the judgment was modified to extend the maintenance period from five to eight years. Additionally, the plaintiff husband was directed to maintain existing medical, dental, and life insurance policies for the benefit of the child and the defendant wife, and to prorate the child's future uninsured healthcare expenses according to parental income proportions. The judgment, as modified, was affirmed.

DivorceAncillary ReliefMaintenance AwardChild SupportMarital Property DivisionAppellate ReviewDomestic Relations LawSpousal SupportHealth InsuranceLife Insurance
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 08, 1995

Morales v. Morales

In a divorce action, the husband appealed portions of a judgment concerning child support, private parochial school tuition, division of a savings/security plan, pension plan, and the valuation of the wife’s practical nurse license. The appellate court modified the judgment regarding the private school tuition, directing the husband to pay 68% instead of the full amount. Crucially, the court also modified the valuation of the wife’s nursing license, rejecting the wife's expert's flawed methodology and adopting the husband's expert's valuation of $98,000 in enhanced earning capacity, crediting the husband with a $9,800 share. The court found the wife's expert's valuation speculative and not founded in economic reality. The judgment, as modified, was affirmed.

Equitable DistributionMarital PropertyEnhanced Earning CapacityProfessional License ValuationChild SupportPrivate School TuitionAppellate ReviewExpert TestimonyValuation MethodologyDivorce Law
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 1995

Gray v. Gray

Plaintiff commenced an action for divorce in October 1993, alleging cruel and inhuman treatment against the defendant. The parties were married in October 1986 and had no children. Following a nonjury trial, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiff a divorce. The defendant subsequently appealed this decision. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, concluding that the lower court did not abuse its discretion. The plaintiff's testimony regarding the defendant's change in religious beliefs and subsequent conduct, supported by a certified social worker, was deemed sufficient to establish cruel and inhuman treatment.

DivorceCruel and Inhuman TreatmentMarital MisconductAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionPreponderance of EvidenceTestimonyReligious BeliefsCo-habitationMental Well-being
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 1988

Wilkinson v. Wilkinson

The plaintiff commenced a divorce action against the defendant on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. The Supreme Court granted the divorce, awarded maintenance, child support, and equitable distribution of marital property. The defendant appealed, contesting the sufficiency of evidence for cruel and inhuman treatment and the excessiveness of the financial awards. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's judgment, finding ample evidence to support the divorce and deeming the maintenance and child support awards reasonable. The court also rejected the defendant's challenge to the valuation of retirement benefits.

DivorceCruel and Inhuman TreatmentEquitable DistributionMarital PropertyMaintenanceChild SupportAppellate ReviewCredibilityEvidence SufficiencyDomestic Relations Law
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Anderson v. Anderson

Cynthia Diane Anderson (Appellee) sued Patrick Wm. Anderson (Appellant) for divorce, resulting in a default judgment on February 15, 2007, as Appellant and his attorney failed to appear. A Motion for New Trial was filed but denied by operation of law, and subsequent motions were also denied. Appellant appealed, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial, incorrectly awarding property, and granting a protective order. The appellate court found the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion for new trial without a hearing and without properly considering the Craddock elements. The court determined Appellant's failure to appear was not intentional, he presented a meritorious defense regarding separate property, and granting a new trial would not cause delay or injury. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the default judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Divorce LawDefault JudgmentMotion for New TrialAbuse of DiscretionCraddock ElementsSeparate PropertyCommunity PropertyAppellate ReviewRemandTexas Civil Procedure
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 1990

Schlachet v. Schlachet

The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed a judgment of divorce entered on December 3, 1990. The case involved a couple married in 1977 with one child, who separated in 1985. The plaintiff, a licensed social worker, reduced her practice to be the primary caretaker and assist the defendant, a practicing psychologist, in his practice. The court properly valued the marital appreciation of the defendant's practice, awarding the plaintiff 50% of this value. The defendant was also directed to pay child support, a significant portion of the child's medical and educational expenses, maintenance to the plaintiff for four years, and a portion of her counsel fees, with the appellate court finding the defendant's arguments unpersuasive.

DivorceEquitable DistributionChild CustodySpousal SupportChild SupportAttorney's FeesProfessional Practice ValuationMarital AssetsAppreciation of PracticeHomemaker Contribution
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 2001

McAteer v. McAteer

This case involves cross appeals from a Supreme Court judgment concerning equitable distribution of marital property and maintenance following a divorce. The parties were married in 1974 and separated in 1989. The Supreme Court initially awarded the plaintiff $400 per month in lifetime maintenance, later amending it to terminate upon the defendant collecting Social Security. The Court also applied the Majauskas formula for pension distribution, using the 1992 unsuccessful divorce action as the terminal date. The Appellate Court modified the judgment, setting the maintenance commencement date and the pension calculation's terminal date to November 15, 1999 (the start of the successful divorce action). The matter was remitted to the Supreme Court for redetermination of these interdependent issues.

Equitable DistributionMaintenance AwardMarital PropertyPension DistributionDivorce ProceedingsRetroactive PaymentsSocial Security EntitlementsAppellate ProcedureFamily Law IssuesJudicial Discretion
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Seminerio v. Seminerio

In an appeal concerning a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant contested awards for maintenance, pension benefits, and attorney's fees. The appellate court modified the judgment by deleting the plaintiff's $800 per month maintenance payments. The decision was affirmed in part and remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings. The court found that the trial court erred in precluding testimony regarding the defendant's anticipated retirement, which should be considered when determining maintenance amount under Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (a). The matter was remitted to admit evidence of the defendant's future earning capacity and the plaintiff's expenses to properly determine maintenance.

DivorceMaintenance PaymentsSpousal SupportAncillary ReliefAppealMarital ResidenceEarning CapacityRetirement BenefitsJudicial ErrorRemittitur
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 1997

McCauley v. McCauley

The case concerns a motion by the defendant, a former husband, to modify his child support and maintenance obligations following the termination of his employment. Justice Vito C. Caruso, of the Supreme Court, Schenectady County, found that the defendant, despite losing his $41,000 per year research scientist position, had not made a diligent effort to find new employment. The court imputed an annual income of $25,000 to the defendant and, after careful consideration of the Child Support Standards Act and the Matter of Holmes v Holmes decision, determined that a $19 per week child support award would be unjust. Consequently, the court modified the maintenance obligation from $190 to $95 per week and set child support at $95 per week, with both parties sharing health care costs, to ensure the children's needs and standard of living were maintained. The defendant's motion was granted in part, resulting in a modification of the original September 23, 1994 divorce judgment.

Child Support ModificationMaintenance ModificationImputed IncomeJob Search DiligenceParental ObligationsDivorce JudgmentSchenectady CountyChild Support Standards ActStandard of LivingBest Interests of the Child
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 17,250 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational