Torre v. Torre, 142 A.D.2d 942 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Torre v. Torre, 142 A.D.2d 942 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
9 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Vanyo v. Buffalo Police Benevolent Assn., Inc. (nyappdiv, 2018-03-16)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Vanyo v. Buffalo Police Benevolent Assn., Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · confidence medium
We conclude that, in the absence of a notice of motion seeking that affirmative relief, the court was without authority to grant such relief to defendants ( see CPLR 2215; Varlaro v Varlaro , 107 AD3d 1596, 1596 [4th Dept 2013]; Daniels v King & Chicken Stuff, Inc ., 35 AD3d 345, 345 [2d Dept 2006]; Torre v Torre [appeal No. 1], 142 AD2d 942, 942 [4th Dept 1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Varlaro v. Varlaro
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Corp., 39 AD3d 608, 609 [2007]; Khaolaead v Leisure Video, 18 AD3d 820, 821 [2005]; Torre v Torre [appeal No. 1], 142 AD2d 942, 942 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Varlaro v. Varlaro
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Corp., 39 AD3d 608, 609 [2007]; Khaolaead v Leisure Video, 18 AD3d 820, 821 [2005]; Torre v Torre [appeal No. 1], 142 AD2d 942, 942 [1988]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Anna Torre
v.
Bernard J. Torre
Appeal No. 1.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jul 7, 1988.
142 A.D.2d 942
Published

Order, insofar as appealed from, unanimously reversed on the law without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: The court erred in ruling on defendant’s application for a reduction in his maintenance obligation without holding a hearing (Wyser-Pratte v Wyser-Pratte, 66 NY2d 715, 717). Therefore, that portion of the first order reducing maintenance is vacated in its entirety and defendant’s request for modification is remitted for a hearing. The court also erred in awarding plaintiff a judgment for arrears and a wage deduction order in the absence of a notice of cross motion demanding such relief (CPLR 2215). We therefore reverse the second order in its entirety and vacate those provisions of the first order which granted plaintiff affirmative relief. Leave is granted to both parties to replead if they be so advised. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mastrella, J.—modify divorce decree.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer and Balio, JJ.