Buntzman v. Buntzman
228 A.D.2d 674, 644 N.Y.2d 986, 644 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7401
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 24, 1996
StatusPublished
This text of 228 A.D.2d 674 (Buntzman v. Buntzman) 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
Buntzman v. Buntzman, 228 A.D.2d 674, 644 N.Y.2d 986, 644 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7401 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).
Opinion
The Family Court had jurisdiction over the instant application (see, Family Ct Act § 466). The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit (see, Matter of Cox v Cox, 181 AD2d 201, 204; Singer v Singer, 180 AD2d 725). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Singer v. Singer
180 A.D.2d 725 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Cox v. Cox
181 A.D.2d 201 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
228 A.D.2d 674, 644 N.Y.2d 986, 644 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buntzman-v-buntzman-nyappdiv-1996.