Proven Results:
Our Reported Cases

by Clifford J. Petroske, Esq. April, 2009
READ MORE ARTICLES

Saravia v. Godzieba

In this custody case involving a two year old boy, we were successful in modifying the decision of the Family Court on appeal to obtain more parenting time for the father on nights and weekends.  The Appellate Division directed that the mother offer the father the right of first refusal to care for the child during her work shifts, prior to making babysitting arrangements.

Hinck v. Hinck

We were successful in dismissing the former wife’s attempt to set aside the parties’ divorce settlement agreement, and the opposing party was court-ordered to pay a portion of our client’s legal fees.

Ruggiero v. Noe (2010)

After the Family Court granted the father sole custody, we were successful in having the appellate court overturn that ruling and direct shared custody, with the mother granted more time and residential rights.

Katsaros v. Katsaros

We successfully defended an appeal of the lower court’s decision in this divorce case to award the wife an interest in the marital residence in accordance with the parties’ pre-nuptial agreement.

Skladanek v. Skladanek

After obtaining substantial awards of maintenance, child support, and attorneys fees for our client at the trial level, we successfully defended those awards on appeal.

Hinck v. Hinck

We defended the trial court’s decision which denied the wife’s motion for summary judgment setting aside the parties’ postnuptial agreement.

McKenna v. McKenna

We successfully appealed a lower Court order which denied the wife’s motion to vacate the parties’ Prenuptial Agreement, and for temporary maintenance and attorneys fees.  The Appellate court held that the wife’s waiver of maintenance and counsel fees upon divorce does not bar an award of temporary relief while the divorce is pending.

Ruggiero v. Noe (2012)

After succeeding at the trial level in getting the mother more time with the child in a shared custody arrangement, we successfully defended matter on appeal, where the appellate court held that “contrary to the father’s contention, shared residential custody does not require that the parties have an exactly equal number of hours with the child.”

Bernholc v. Bornstein

In this oft-cited divorce case, successfully briefed by Clifford Petroske, the appellate court held that the trial court should have granted the husband his equitable share of the appreciation in value of the wife’s pre-marriage home which was due in part to his direct and indirect contributions, that the husband was entitled to recoup a share of the marital funds used to pay the mortgage, and that he should not have to pay a portion of the wife’s credit card debt.

Reynolds v. Reynolds

753 N.Y.S.2d 106 (2d Dept., 2002)
In this post-judgment case, we represented a father who had lost his job and was unable to find new employment at a level sufficient to meet his child support obligation. The appellate division found it was error to deny his modification request without a hearing, and overturned the award of attorney’s fees to his ex-wife.

Hinck v. Hinck

On appeal, we succeeded in increasing the attorneys fees awarded to our client for defending his former wife’s attempts to set aside the parties’ divorce settlement.

Seminara v. Seminara

In this multi-state custody contest, the Appellate Division agreed that New York retained jurisdiction to modify custody under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) even though the child had lived in Florida for more than six months.

Zwillman v. Kull

In this post-judgment visitation modification case, we succeeded in obtaining meaningful visitation for an out-of-state father, and defended the Family Court’s decision on appeal.

Gort v. Kull

We obtained a remarkable order from the Family Court granting our client full weekend visits with her grandchild each month, which we then successfully defended on appeal.

Lee v. Lee

After the Family Court granted the ex-husband a downward modification of his lifetime maintenance obligation, we were successfull in having the ruling overturned on appeal, and all monies reimbursed to our client.

Janofsky v. Janofsky

648 N.Y.S.2d 164 (2d Dept., 1996)
In this QDRO case successfully briefed by Clifford Petroske, the appellate court held that it was error for the QDRO to award the former wife a survivor benefit on her former husband’s pension, since their divorce settlement did not include such a provision.

Request a free consultation

When facing a divorce, child custody, or child support case, you deserve a lawyer who will listen to your concerns and take the time to explain your options, and who has the knowledge and experience to give you the best advice.

The best way to identify whether a Long Island divorce lawyer is right for you is to meet with the lawyer for an initial consultation. At Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, we are proud to offer potential clients a free, confidential consultation where they can learn more about our experience and discuss their legal dispute. We can also offer our preliminary assessment about how the dispute will likely turn out as well as what evidence you will need for a favorable outcome.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

These consultations are entirely no-risk. If you like what you hear, we can discuss our fees and then go ahead and formalize the attorney-client relationship. If you want to meet with other Long Island family law attorneys, then that is absolutely fine as well.

Complete the Form or call now for a free consultation (631)337-1977.

Why Choose Petroske Riezenman & Meyers

There are countless Long Island attorneys who will promise to aggressively represent your interests in a divorce or family law dispute. But only one firm has the right mix of attributes to provide cutting-edge legal representation along with compassionate support in this stressful time.

At Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, our success is built on three pillars:

Knowledge

Matrimonial and family law changes often. New developments come out of Albany every year, and the courts implement the law in sometimes surprising ways. To effectively protect your interests, you need a lawyer who understands the latest developments in the law, however minor. We stay informed of upcoming amendments and trends in the law. We know the latest court decisions coming from remote counties that might impact how a judge decides a case here in Long Island. If there is a prior case out of the Family Courts that helps you, we will find it and bring it to the attention of the judge.

See our Articles, FAQs and Videos Library.

Experience

Family law disputes are not like other lawsuits. These disputes are governed by different laws and different judges. Although you can ask a criminal defense lawyer or an immigration attorney to handle your matrimonial or family law dispute, you should not be surprised if they are soon in over their heads and unable to provide effective representation. At Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, our attorneys and support staff have dedicated their careers to excellence and professionalism in the practice of matrimonial and family law.

Learn more About Us.

Results

We are proud to be highly recommended by the many satisfied clients we have represented over the years in divorce and Family Court cases. No attorney can promise a result, and we do not claim to. But experience counts. We have over 60 years of combined experience, which allows us to perform a complete review of your case and discover facts that work to your advantage. We understand the unique challenges that family law disputes create, such as the risk of domestic violence, impediments to negotiated resolution, or the possibility of harassing or vexatious litigation. To see the positive results we have achieved for others, check out our Client Reviews.

Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, P.C. staff