Bernstein v. Bernstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bernstein v. Bernstein

122 A.D.2d 96, 504 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59165

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

DecidedJuly 14, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 122 A.D.2d 96 (Bernstein v. Bernstein) 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

Bernstein v. Bernstein, 122 A.D.2d 96, 504 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59165 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a matrimonial action, the husband appeals from a purported order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berkowitz, J.), entered October 25, 1985, which denied his motion for an order granting him possession and ownership of the marital premises.

Appeal from the purported order dismissed (see, CPLR 2219, 5512 [a]).

Special Term did not sign an order in appealable form. Hence, no appeal lies to this court. Even if the order were in proper form, the absence of minutes makes it impossible for this court to pass upon the correctness of Special Term’s ruling. Consequently, if the appellant wishes to pursue this [97]*97matter, it will be necessary for him to make a new application for the desired relief at Special Term. Niehoff, J. P., Rubin, Eiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— In a matrimonial action, the husband appeals from a purported order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berkowitz, J.), entered October 25, 1985, which denied his motion for an order granting him possession and ownership of the marital premises.

Appeal from the purported order dismissed (see, CPLR 2219, 5512 [a]).

Special Term did not sign an order in appealable form. Hence, no appeal lies to this court. Even if the order were in proper form, the absence of minutes makes it impossible for this court to pass upon the correctness of Special Term’s ruling. Consequently, if the appellant wishes to pursue this [97]*97matter, it will be necessary for him to make a new application for the desired relief at Special Term. Niehoff, J. P., Rubin, Eiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 A.D.2d 96, 504 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bernstein-v-bernstein-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack