Pendente lite counsel fees were awarded without any statement by plaintiff's attorney as to the services rendered, the issues involved or the complexity of the issues to be decided at trial. Thus, there has not been compliance with section 660.22 of the Bronx and New York County Supreme Court Rules (22 NYCRR). There was no "good cause shown" to waive these requirements and it was therefore an abuse of discretion to grant the application. (Suter v Suter,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
MANGUM v. MANGUM
93 A.D.2d 749 (1983)
Jean Mangum, Respondent, v. Robert J. Mangum, Appellant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
April 14, 1983
April 14, 1983
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
