Bishock v. Bishock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bishock v. Bishock

280 A.D. 830, 114 N.Y.S.2d 24, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3851

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

DecidedJune 30, 1952

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 280 A.D. 830 (Bishock v. Bishock) 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

Bishock v. Bishock, 280 A.D. 830, 114 N.Y.S.2d 24, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3851 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by a wife for separation, defendant appeals from an order adjudging him in contempt for failure to make payment" of alimony and counsel fees, as provided by court order; and staying him from taking any affirmative proceedings in the action until the counsel .fees, due and payable, and at least 50% of the arrears in alimony have been paid. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. While a copy of the order directing payment of the counsel fee and alimony was not served on defendant personally, he had knowledge of the order and its terms, and a copy of said order was served on his attorney. Carswell, Acting P. J., Adel, Wenzel, MaeCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action by a wife for separation, defendant appeals from an order adjudging him in contempt for failure to make payment" of alimony and counsel fees, as provided by court order; and staying him from taking any affirmative proceedings in the action until the counsel .fees, due and payable, and at least 50% of the arrears in alimony have been paid. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. While a copy of the order directing payment of the counsel fee and alimony was not served on defendant personally, he had knowledge of the order and its terms, and a copy of said order was served on his attorney. Carswell, Acting P. J., Adel, Wenzel, MaeCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D. 830, 114 N.Y.S.2d 24, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bishock-v-bishock-nyappdiv-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack