From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tongue v. Tongue

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 16, 1984
61 N.Y.2d 809 (N.Y. 1984)

Opinion

Decided February 16, 1984

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, D. VINCENT CERRITO, J.

Robert W. Kahn and Peter K. Levine for appellant.

Michael R. Cuevas for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Both plaintiff and defendant agreed on the record in open court not to contest the allegations of each other's claims for divorce and to take "a mutual divorce against one another." After receiving competent oral proof of the grounds for divorce, in accordance with section 211 of the Domestic Relations Law, the court adjudged plaintiff and defendant to be absolutely divorced. Inasmuch as defendant received precisely what he had requested and stipulated to, he is not an aggrieved party within the purview of CPLR 5511. The Appellate Division, therefore, correctly dismissed his appeal.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, MEYER, SIMONS and KAYE concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

Tongue v. Tongue

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 16, 1984
61 N.Y.2d 809 (N.Y. 1984)
Case details for

Tongue v. Tongue

Case Details

Full title:MILDRED TONGUE, Respondent, v. VERNON TONGUE, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 16, 1984

Citations

61 N.Y.2d 809 (N.Y. 1984)
473 N.Y.S.2d 950
462 N.E.2d 127

Citing Cases

Wu v. Bethune

On the court's own motion, it is ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed on the ground that no appeal lies from…

Vernon v. Vernon

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erred in failing to provide him with an opportunity to proceed…