ROY W. LENNOX, plf-ap, v. JOAN E. WEBERMAN, def-res

8577-8577A. ROY W. LENNOX, plf-ap, v. JOAN E. WEBERMAN, def-res — Stein Riso Mantel, LLP, New York (Allan D. Mantel, Kevin M. Donough and Adam J. Turbowitz of counsel), for ap — Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, New York (Charles Fox Miller of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Deborah A. Kaplan, J.), entered March 30, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, upon reargument, and denial of renewal, adhered to a prior order, entered February 10, 2012, granting defendant's motion for pendente lite relief to the extent of awarding her tax-free maintenance in the amount of $38,000 per month, directing plaintiff to pay, inter alia, defendant's unreimbursed medical expenses up to $2,000 per month, interim counsel fees of $50,000, and expert fees of $35,000, and holding plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment and for counsel fees in abeyance, unanimously modified, on the facts, to provide that the aforesaid pendente lite relief shall be treated as an advance on the 50 percent of the parties' Joint Funds (as defined in the parties' prenuptial agreement) to which defendant is entitled pursuant to the prenuptial agreement, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the February 10, 2012 order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superseded by the appeal from the latter order.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

8577-8577A. ROY W. LENNOX, plf-ap, v. JOAN E. WEBERMAN, def-res — Stein Riso Mantel, LLP, New York (Allan D. Mantel, Kevin M. Donough and Adam J. Turbowitz of counsel), for ap — Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, New York (Charles Fox Miller of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Deborah A. Kaplan, J.), entered March 30, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, upon reargument, and denial of renewal, adhered to a prior order, entered February 10, 2012, granting defendant’s motion for pendente lite relief to the extent of awarding her tax-free maintenance in the amount of $38,000 per month, directing plaintiff to pay, inter alia, defendant’s unreimbursed medical expenses up to $2,000 per month, interim counsel fees of $50,000, and expert fees of $35,000, and holding plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment and for counsel fees in abeyance, unanimously modified, on the facts, to provide that the aforesaid pendente lite relief shall be treated as an advance on the 50 percent of the parties’ Joint Funds (as defined in the parties’ prenuptial agreement) to which defendant is entitled pursuant to the prenuptial agreement, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the February 10, 2012 order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superseded by the appeal from the latter order.

We find that the court properly applied the formula set forth at Domestic Relations Law §236 (B) (5-a)(c)(2)(a) (see Khaira v. Khaira, 93 AD3d 194 [1st Dept 2012]) in calculating defendant’s temporary spousal maintenance award. Specifically, the court listed all 19 of the enumerated factors, explained how 7 of them supported an upward deviation to $38,000 per month from the $12,500 a month in guideline support, and found that $38,000 per month was not “unjust or inappropriate.”

ROY W. LENNOX, plf-ap, v. JOAN E. WEBERMAN, def-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal