Broderson v. Broderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Broderson v. Broderson

32 A.D.2d 925, 303 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3471

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.2d 925 (Broderson v. Broderson) 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

Broderson v. Broderson, 32 A.D.2d 925, 303 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3471 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding under section 466 (subd. [c]) of the Family Court Act to enforce support provisions of a foreign (Mexican) decree of divorce, in which appellant, inter alia, applied for a downward modification predicated upon an alleged change in circumstances, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated December 18, 1968, which directed appellant to pay $85 per week, together with $15 a week on account of arrears computed at $1,714.07, or one half of his income, whichever amount would be the greater. Order affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the determination made below is in conformity with the holding of this court on the reargument of the original appeal, is supported by sufficient evidence and is consistent with equitable considerations. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Martuseello, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding under section 466 (subd. [c]) of the Family Court Act to enforce support provisions of a foreign (Mexican) decree of divorce, in which appellant, inter alia, applied for a downward modification predicated upon an alleged change in circumstances, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Queens County, dated December 18, 1968, which directed appellant to pay $85 per week, together with $15 a week on account of arrears computed at $1,714.07, or one half of his income, whichever amount would be the greater. Order affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the determination made below is in conformity with the holding of this court on the reargument of the original appeal, is supported by sufficient evidence and is consistent with equitable considerations. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Martuseello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.2d 925, 303 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/broderson-v-broderson-nyappdiv-1969.