From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Handel v. Handel

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 4, 1970
26 N.Y.2d 853 (N.Y. 1970)

Opinion

Argued February 16, 1970

Decided March 4, 1970

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, RAYMOND E. ALDRICH, JR., J.

Ben-Allen Breslow and Nathaniel Rubin for appellant.

Mark H. Alcott, Martin Kleinbard and Lloyd L. Rosenthal for respondent.


Order affirmed, with costs, and the question certified answered in the affirmative in the following memorandum:

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirmative on the ground that respondent-appellant failed to move for a protective order under CPLR 3122 or to show cause why his failure to so move was excusable ( Zeif v. Zeif, 31 A.D.2d 625; Coffey v. Orbachs, Inc., 22 A.D.2d 317, 319-320), and neither the Appellate Division nor the Family Court exercised discretion to excuse compliance with CPLR 3122, a discretion which either court undoubtedly had. No other issue is passed upon.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.


Summaries of

Matter of Handel v. Handel

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 4, 1970
26 N.Y.2d 853 (N.Y. 1970)
Case details for

Matter of Handel v. Handel

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ESTELLE D. HANDEL, Respondent, v. BERNARD HANDEL…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 4, 1970

Citations

26 N.Y.2d 853 (N.Y. 1970)
309 N.Y.S.2d 599
258 N.E.2d 94

Citing Cases

People ex Rel. Greenwald v. Greenwald

This encompasses his ability to pay in relation to his wealth." In any event, the rule of Matter of Schwartz…

Matter of Kern v. Kern

Respondent further argues that where as here the petitioner has not claimed that the terms of the 1966…