Anderson v. Barton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anderson v. Barton

48 A.D.2d 694, 371 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9737

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

DecidedMay 27, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 694 (Anderson v. Barton) 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

Anderson v. Barton, 48 A.D.2d 694, 371 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9737 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action in which plaintiff had been granted a judgment of divorce, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 8, 1975, which denied his motion to vacate a prior default order of the same court granting plaintiff’s motion to punish defendant for contempt for failure to obey an order directing him to make support payments. Order reversed, without costs, defendant’s motion granted and case remanded to Special Term for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. On the record, denial of defendant’s motion to vacate the order punishing him for contempt was an improvident exercise of discretion. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In an action in which plaintiff had been granted a judgment of divorce, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 8, 1975, which denied his motion to vacate a prior default order of the same court granting plaintiff’s motion to punish defendant for contempt for failure to obey an order directing him to make support payments. Order reversed, without costs, defendant’s motion granted and case remanded to Special Term for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. On the record, denial of defendant’s motion to vacate the order punishing him for contempt was an improvident exercise of discretion. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 694, 371 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-barton-nyappdiv-1975.