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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
Complete the Form or call now for a free consultation (631)337-1977.
Why Choose Petroske Riezenman & Meyers
Matrimonial and family law changes often. We stay informed of upcoming amendments and trends in the law. See our Articles, FAQ’s and Videos Library.
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.
We are proud to be highly recommended by the many satisfied clients we have represented over the years in divorce and Family Court cases. See our Client Reviews.