Attorney Brian Anthony Picarello's Legal Cases

Appeals

In the Matter of Coward v Biddle

Nov 30, 2022

OUTCOME: Our client received his award of counsel fees

The mother is appealing two orders from the Family Court, Suffolk County. The first order, dated April 14, 2021, granted the father's request for attorneys' fees, directing the mother to pay $3,000 dir ... ectly to the father's counsel. The second order, dated December 8, 2021, found the mother in civil contempt for not complying with the first order and awarded additional attorneys' fees, totaling $7,500 (including the initial $3,000), to be paid directly to the father's counsel. The appellate court affirms both orders without costs or disbursements.

Child custody

In the Matter of Montebello v Montebello

Jun 30, 2020

OUTCOME: Father granted sole legal custody

In a Custody proceeding, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County dated June 13, 2019, where after a hearing, the Court granted the father’s petition for sole custody of the ... subject child and awarded parental access to the mother. The appellate division affirmed

Child custody

James v James

Feb 07, 2020

OUTCOME: Obtained sole custody for a Father living in a different state

The Petitioner-Mother removed the parties four (4) children from the state of Massachusetts where they lived with both parents and moved with them to New York against the wishes of the Respondent-Fathe ... r. Mother refused access and waited until New York obtained jurisdiction to file for custody of the children. Respondent-Father cross-filed and after two (2) years and a full custody trial, the Court awarded the Father sole custody and ordered the children to move back to Massachusetts.

Alimony

In the Matter of Kudla v Kudla

Jun 26, 2019

OUTCOME: Affirmed Order of Lifetime Spousal Support to my Client (Plaintiff)

Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff's motion to hold the defendant in civil contempt for failure to pay maintenance in accordance with terms of parties' judgmen ... t of divorce and denying the defendant's motion for credit towards maintenance obligation. The plaintiff demonstrated judgment of divorce, which incorporated but did not merge separation agreement, is lawful order of the court and contained unequivocal mandate that, upon the sale of the former marital residence, the defendant would pay maintenance in the sum of $100 per week to the plaintiff. The plaintiff further demonstrated the defendant violated an unequivocal mandate, of which he was aware, by failing to pay her sum of $100 per week in maintenance after the former marital residence was sold in late 2016 and that his failure prejudiced her right to receive maintenance. In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a factual dispute and provided no evidence he was unable to pay maintenance obligation. As the defendant's opposition papers failed to raise factual dispute/defense, a hearing was not required to make a finding of contempt.

Divorce and separation

Marro v Marro

Apr 30, 2019

OUTCOME: Our client (Plaintiff-Wife) was successful after trial and was awarded a substantial sum

In a matrimonial action for the equitable distribution of a sizeable marital estate, the Plaintiff-Wife was awarded, after trial, half of all of the Husband's real estate holdings, investments, his ove ... r 30 bank accounts (most of which were held in secret), retirement assets, and business assets, and compelled the Defendant-Husband to liquidate all of his holdings and pay the Wife's counsel fees. The Plaintiff-wife was awarded 4x as much as what was offered during settlement negotiations.

Child custody

In the Matter of Donna Pitkanen v Ryan Huscher.

Dec 19, 2018

OUTCOME: Affirmed trial court's determination of sole custody to the Mother

The trial court's order, after a hearing, granted the mother’s petition for custody of the parties’ child, denied the father’s petition for custody of the child, and awarded the mother sole legal and r ... esidential custody of the child, with parental access to the father. The Appellate Division affirmed stating that the court’s paramount concern in any custody dispute is to determine, under the totality of the circumstances, what is in the best interests of the child, and although joint custody is encouraged as a voluntary alternative, it is appropriate only in cases where the parties involved are relatively stable, amicable parents who can behave in a mature, civilized fashion. Here, the family court's determination that the child’s best interests would be served by awarding sole legal and residential custody to the mother has a sound and substantial basis in the record and would not be disturbed.

Brian Anthony Picarello's Legal Cases (6)

In the Matter of Coward v Biddle

In the Matter of Montebello v Montebello

James v James

In the Matter of Kudla v Kudla

Marro v Marro

In the Matter of Donna Pitkanen v Ryan Huscher.