Divorce Lawyers New York - Recent Family Law Decisons (69)
RECENT FAMILY LAW DECISIONS (69)
Where a guardian ad litem was specifically authorized to defend the interests of a ward in court, and where a defense in court necessarily entailed legal representation, it was proper to award attorney fees to the guardian ad litem.
Subsection (b) is a mandatory provision which required the trial court to order the parent against whom a child support enforcement action was brought to pay the costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the custodial parent in bringing the action when the delinquent parent failed to pay support without cause or justification.
When it becomes necessary for a party to go into court in order to enforce rights under a judgment of dissolution, the party who is thus forced to resort to judicial process to secure compliance with the judgment is entitled to her reasonable attorney fees even absent a showing of inability to pay those fees.
When it becomes necessary for one to retain an attorney for the purpose of enforcing a previously entered child support order, she is entitled to reasonable attorney fees, provided the financial standards of the Act are met.
Financial Resources
Requiring petitioner to pay her own attorney and expert witness fees would neither undermine her financial stability nor strip her of her means of support.
Under subsection (b), it is not necessary for the petitioning party to show an inability to pay, or the relative financial position of the parties.
Where petitioner would be unable to pay her attorney fees and costs without depleting part of the marital assets awarded to her and respondent would be able to pay his fees as well as petitioner’s fees without depleting assets, based on his income and additional bonuses, it was appropriate that respondent pay all of the fees.
A spouse need not sell her assets in order to pay attorney fees.
The court did not abuse its discretion in requiring husband to pay $3,500 of wife’s attorney fees, where the court could have found from the evidence presented that wife was financially unable to pay the fees and doing so would have undermined her economic stability, and, that with husband’s income, he had the ability to pay.
Where the lack of evidence of respondent’s ability to pay was the direct result of his refusal to present evidence of his financial condition, respondent waived the issue of his ability or inability to pay the attorney fees.
Where the trial court determined that wife was financially unable to pay her attorney fees while husband had the ability to do so, the court was well within its discretion in requiring husband to pay the wife’s attorney fees.
Trial court did not err in finding that neither husband nor wife was in a financial position to pay their own attorney fees or that the husband did not have the financial ability to pay the wife’s fees and costs where the record established that the husband’s monthly costs where the record established that the husband’s monthly expenses exceeded his income by approximately $120.
Trial court properly exercised its discretion in requiring husband to pay a portion of wife’s attorney fees where it carefully considered the financial position of each party.
Where wife’s income was held to be insufficient to cover costs and fees incurred during lengthy litigation and as the husband had superior earning power and potential for acquiring additional assets, he was better able to bear costs.
