Baird v. Baird

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baird v. Baird

26 A.D.2d 626, 272 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3652

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

DecidedJuly 5, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 626 (Baird v. Baird) 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

Baird v. Baird, 26 A.D.2d 626, 272 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3652 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to reform and to specifically enforce a separation agreement and [627]*627for other relief, in which judgment was entered against the defendant divorced husband, the latter appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered December 13, 1965, as inter alia adjudged him in contempt of court and fined him $250 by reason of his failure to furnish an account of income and expenses pertaining to certain premises as required by a prior order of the court. Order insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs, and motion to adjudge defendant in contempt denied. Under the unusual circumstances disclosed by this record, it is our opinion that it was an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the motion to adjudge defendant in contempt. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to reform and to specifically enforce a separation agreement and [627]*627for other relief, in which judgment was entered against the defendant divorced husband, the latter appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered December 13, 1965, as inter alia adjudged him in contempt of court and fined him $250 by reason of his failure to furnish an account of income and expenses pertaining to certain premises as required by a prior order of the court. Order insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs, and motion to adjudge defendant in contempt denied. Under the unusual circumstances disclosed by this record, it is our opinion that it was an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the motion to adjudge defendant in contempt. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 626, 272 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baird-v-baird-nyappdiv-1966.