General

Zandra-Iolani C. Lightbourne, Respondent, v. Henry C. R. Lightbourne, Appellant

179 A.D.2d 562·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1992·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Zandra-Iolani C. Lightbourne, Respondent, v Henry C. R. Lightbourne, Appellant. [MAJORITY] While a parent may not be deprived of his or her right to reasonable and meaningful access to a child absent exceptional circumstances (Daghir v Daghir, 82 AD2d 191, 194, affd 56 NY2d 938), supervised visitation is not a deprivation to meaningful access (see, Matter of Aadahl v Aadahl, 148 AD2d 531), and defendant will have a full opportunity to present evidence at the time of the hearing for a final custody award. Nor was the award of temporary maintenance improper, the court having balanced the parties’ financial status, necessities and obligations (Rauch v Rauch, 83 AD2d 847). We find no abuse of discretion in the direction that retroactive maintenance (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a]) be paid at the rate of $200 a week. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ellerin, Ross and Kassal, JJ.