§

In the Matter of Rodriguez

15 I&N Dec. 227 (B.I.A. 1975)
In the Matter of Rodriguez

4 Cited authorities

  1. Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel

    16 N.Y.2d 64 (N.Y. 1965)   Cited 77 times
    In Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel, 1965, 16 N.Y.2d 64, 262 N.Y.S.2d 86, 209 N.E.2d 709, 13 A.L.R.3d 1401, cert. den. 384 U.S. 971, 86 S.Ct. 1861, 16 L.Ed.2d 682, the Court of Appeals of New York was presented with the question whether such a bilateral divorce granted in the State of Chihuahua, Mexico, was entitled to recognition in New York State.

  2. Rosenbaum v. Rosenbaum

    309 N.Y. 371 (N.Y. 1955)   Cited 84 times
    Holding that plaintiff was not entitled to an injunction to restrain her husband from prosecuting a Mexican divorce action because the divorce action was a "clear legal nullity" where neither party was domiciled in Mexico

  3. De Pena v. De Pena

    31 A.D.2d 415 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)   Cited 8 times

    March 18, 1969. Appeal from the Family Court, New York County, FRANCIS J. McCAFFREY, J. Leon Fuhrer of counsel ( Goldstein Goldstein, attorneys), for appellant. Leonard Koerner of counsel ( Stanley Buchsbaum with him on the brief; J. Lee Rankin, Corporation Counsel), for respondent. EAGER, J.P. This is a support proceeding instituted in Family Court and the respondent-appellant appeals from an order of that court requiring him to pay a weekly sum for the support of the petitioning wife and a child

  4. Ramm v. Ramm

    28 N.Y.2d 892 (N.Y. 1971)   Cited 5 times

    Argued April 12, 1971 Decided May 12, 1971 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, LESTER HOLTZMAN, J. Albert A. DuPont, Paul C. Ludwig, Jr. and Stephen J. Masse for appellant. Martin J. Rosen and David Miller Kahn for respondents. Order affirmed, without costs, on the opinion at the Appellate Division. Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON. Judge SCILEPPI dissents and votes to reverse on the dissenting opinion