Occasionally, the Appellate Division, Second Department, speaks with illuminating clarity. In Palydowycz v. Palydowycz (NYLJ, April 14), it did just that. In doing so, it had to overturn the contrary precedent established in 2010 by an appellate panel composed of its very own members. It also abandoned a fundamentally logical and commonsensical rule of law that it had embraced for the prior six years.
Significant to the divorcing business owners out there, their maintenance payments under Payldowycz are likely to be far greater. To the maintenance payee counterpart, Palydowycz is a cause for celebration.
