Justice John Colangelo
Wife GC sought to recover attorney fees from husband KC in this post-judgment matrimonial action. The fees related to attorney time spent on various post-judgment motions and cross-motions, time on counsel’s efforts to recover fees, including the conduct of a fee hearing. A prior court found KC’s dilatory tactics needlessly prolonged the parties’ matrimonial action, awarding wife counsel fees of over $550,000. This court noted KC’s obstructionism and dilatory conduct continued forcing GC to engage in motion practice to vindicate her rights under the parties’ unambiguous stipulation for which she sought counsel fees. It ruled as KC’s conduct resulted in needless expenditure of time, resources and fees by GC, he bore responsibility for them under statutory and case law. KC insisted on a hearing on the issue of attorney fees, to which he was entitled, but the court found he had no cognizable defense to GC’s claim, concluding the hearing served no purpose other than further delay. The court ruled GC satisfied the threshold established in O’Shea v. O’Shea which permitted a court to award legal fees expended by a party in their effort to recover a counsel fees award. Thus, KC was responsible for 75 percent of GC’s net legal fees.