Aminoff v. Aminoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aminoff v. Aminoff

3 A.D.2d 654, 158 N.Y.S.2d 631, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6652

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 22, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 654 (Aminoff v. Aminoff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aminoff v. Aminoff, 3 A.D.2d 654, 158 N.Y.S.2d 631, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6652 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying plaintiff’s motion to punish the defendant for contempt unanimously affirmed. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for the entry of judgment for the amount of arrears due and unpaid under the decree unanimously reversed and the motion granted. While a stipulation settling several disputes between the parties and requiring certain implementing action on the part of the plaintiff underlay the decree of separation entered in this action, the decree, as pointed out in our decision on a prior appeal (286 App. Div. 514), was an independent determination of the court. It contained no reference to the other action to be taken, and the provision for the payment of alimony was unconditional. So long as the decree stood it was defendant’s obligation to abide by its terms, although we agree that the circumstances of the nonpayment here absolve defendant of the charge of contempt. The plaintiff’s attack on the decree, successfully resisted by defendant, did not undermine the decree or suspend the operation of its provisions. No more now may defendant contend that there was a period during which he was exempt from the obligation of paying alimony. Settle order on notice, without costs. Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein, Valente and Bergan, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order denying plaintiff’s motion to punish the defendant for contempt unanimously affirmed. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for the entry of judgment for the amount of arrears due and unpaid under the decree unanimously reversed and the motion granted. While a stipulation settling several disputes between the parties and requiring certain implementing action on the part of the plaintiff underlay the decree of separation entered in this action, the decree, as pointed out in our decision on a prior appeal (286 App. Div. 514), was an independent determination of the court. It contained no reference to the other action to be taken, and the provision for the payment of alimony was unconditional. So long as the decree stood it was defendant’s obligation to abide by its terms, although we agree that the circumstances of the nonpayment here absolve defendant of the charge of contempt. The plaintiff’s attack on the decree, successfully resisted by defendant, did not undermine the decree or suspend the operation of its provisions. No more now may defendant contend that there was a period during which he was exempt from the obligation of paying alimony. Settle order on notice, without costs. Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein, Valente and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 654, 158 N.Y.S.2d 631, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aminoff-v-aminoff-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack