The marital residence did not become marital property where its increase in value was primarily due to market forces and inflation, but the husband was entitled to one-half of the amount of the actual value added by improvements to the residence.
Chan v. Chan, ___ A.D.2d ___, 701 N.Y.S.2d 114 (1999).
The wife was entitled to 25% of the appreciation in value of the marital residence.
Teabout v. Teabout, ___ A.D.2d ___, 703 N.Y.S.2d 571 (2000).
The court is allowed to consider fairness in awarding equitable distribution in a dissolution proceeding, and therefore the husband could be excluded from a share in the marital home, based upon his neglectful conduct.
Rindos v. Rindos, ___ A.D.2d ___, 694 N.Y.S.2d 735 (1999).
The wife was granted exclusive use and occupancy of the marital residence until emancipation of the couple's youngest child.
Marano v. Marano, ___ A.D.2d ___, 607 N.Y.S.2d 359 (1994).
The trial court erred in ordering the immediate sale of the marital residence, where wife needed to occupy it as the custodial parent and she appeared able to maintain the residence herself.
DiSanto v. DiSanto, ___ A.D.2d ___, 604 N.Y.S.2d 413 (1993).
Decision to award marital home to wife was supported in part by evidence that husband led her to believe she would eventually receive home if she accepted relatively low support and maintenance payments during the period of separation.
Teabout v. Teabout, ___ A.D.2d ___, 703 N.Y.S.2d 571 (2000).
The court is allowed to consider fairness in awarding equitable distribution in a dissolution proceeding, and therefore the husband could be excluded from a share in the marital home, based upon his neglectful conduct.
To learn more about the marital home in divorce, consult our explanation here.
