From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Solemene v. Solemene

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1930
229 App. Div. 728 (N.Y. App. Div. 1930)

Opinion

April, 1930.


Order granting plaintiff's motion for alimony and counsel fee reversed upon the law and the facts, without costs, and motion denied, without costs. The continued existence of the separation agreement bars the granting of this motion. It does not satisfactorily appear in this record that the defendant breached the agreement or that the agreement did not subsist at the time of the commencement of this action. ( Rosenblatt v. Rosenblatt, 209 App. Div. 373; Drane v. Drane, 207 id. 217; Brody v. Brody, 190 id. 806; Benesch v. Benesch, 182 id. 221; Beebe v. Beebe, 174 id. 408; Johnson v. Johnson, 206 N.Y. 561; Winter v. Winter, 191 id. 462.) Lazansky, P.J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Solemene v. Solemene

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1930
229 App. Div. 728 (N.Y. App. Div. 1930)
Case details for

Solemene v. Solemene

Case Details

Full title:MICHELINA SOLEMENE, Respondent, v. ANGELO R. SOLEMENE, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 1, 1930

Citations

229 App. Div. 728 (N.Y. App. Div. 1930)

Citing Cases

Lee v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue (In re Estate of Lee)

Petitioners in this case have not shown us in what respect the Court of Appeals was in error in its…

" LEBOLT" v. " LEBOLT"

It is not in the power of either party acting alone and against the will of the other to destroy or change…