Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion for an award of costs and attorney’s fees to enable her to prosecute her appeal from the order dated April 7, 1994 (see, Kret v Kret, 222 AD2d 412; Kavanakudiyil v Kavanakudiyil, 203 AD2d 250). Rosenblatt, J. P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.
Philomena Inzeo, Appellant, v. Dennis Inzeo, Respondent
228 A.D.2d 564644 N.Y.S.2d 627
Authorities cited
No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.