Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant contends that the pendente lite order directed him to pay amounts so excessive as to constitute an improvident exercise of discretion. We disagree.
The record reveals that the Supreme Court gave due consideration to the plaintiff's needs as well as the defendant's ability to provide for those needs, and the relief granted did not amount to an improvident exercise of discretion (see, Isham...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
