Brinkman v. Brinkman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brinkman v. Brinkman

13 A.D.2d 1024, 217 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9993

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

DecidedJune 26, 1961

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 13 A.D.2d 1024 (Brinkman v. Brinkman) 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

Brinkman v. Brinkman, 13 A.D.2d 1024, 217 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9993 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by the wife for a judicial separation, the husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 27, 1961, which referred to an Official Referee to hear and report (or to hear and determine if both parties consent), a motion by the wife to punish the husband for contempt by reason of his failure to pay arrears in alimony, and a cross motion by the husband to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution and for other relief. Appeal dismissed, without costs, on the grounds: (1) that plaintiff has not consented that an Official Referee hear and determine the motions; and (2) that an order referring a matter to an Official Referee to hear and report is not appealable (Rayex Corp. v. Sanchez, 6 A D 2d 903; Cameron v. Cameron, 2 A D 2d 979; Newcomb v. Newcomb, 281 App. Div. 689; Bazel v. Bazel, 282 App. Div. 952, and cases therein cited). Beldock, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action by the wife for a judicial separation, the husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 27, 1961, which referred to an Official Referee to hear and report (or to hear and determine if both parties consent), a motion by the wife to punish the husband for contempt by reason of his failure to pay arrears in alimony, and a cross motion by the husband to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution and for other relief. Appeal dismissed, without costs, on the grounds: (1) that plaintiff has not consented that an Official Referee hear and determine the motions; and (2) that an order referring a matter to an Official Referee to hear and report is not appealable (Rayex Corp. v. Sanchez, 6 A D 2d 903; Cameron v. Cameron, 2 A D 2d 979; Newcomb v. Newcomb, 281 App. Div. 689; Bazel v. Bazel, 282 App. Div. 952, and cases therein cited). Beldock, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.2d 1024, 217 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brinkman-v-brinkman-nyappdiv-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack