The challenged imputation of income was properly based on plaintiff's testimony concerning the parties' marital lifestyle, and on defendant's testimony concerning his income and expenses that was so inconsistent, illogical and evasive as to support an adverse inference that he was hiding assets and deliberately reducing his income in order to avoid his obligation for child support (Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] [b] [5] [v]; see, Wildenstein v Wildenstein,
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.
COHEN v. COHEN
294 A.D.2d 184 (2002)
741 N.Y.S.2d 686
HANNAH COHEN, Respondent, v. ELDAR COHEN, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided May 14, 2002.
Decided May 14, 2002.
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.
