Chait v. Chait

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chait v. Chait

270 A.D.2d 259, 704 N.Y.S.2d 834, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2507

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

DecidedMarch 6, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 259 (Chait v. Chait) 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

Chait v. Chait, 270 A.D.2d 259, 704 N.Y.S.2d 834, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2507 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Not-for-Profit Corporation Law § 1510 (e), the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered February 18, 1999, which denied her petition to disinter the body of her deceased husband, Arnold Chait, from Beth David Cemetery and to reinter his body in Mount Carmel Cemetery on condition that the respondents convey to the petitioner title to the burial plot immediately adjacent to that of Arnold Chait.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the petition to disinter Arnold Chait on condition that the respondents transfer to the petitioner title to the burial plot immediately adjacent to that of Arnold Chait (see, Matter of Fromm, 280 App Div 1022; Matter of McEvilly, 54 Misc 2d 602; Matter of Frost v St. Paul’s Cemetery Assn., 44 Misc 2d 589; Matter of Costa, 83 NYS2d 65, affd 274 App Div 872). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to Not-for-Profit Corporation Law § 1510 (e), the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered February 18, 1999, which denied her petition to disinter the body of her deceased husband, Arnold Chait, from Beth David Cemetery and to reinter his body in Mount Carmel Cemetery on condition that the respondents convey to the petitioner title to the burial plot immediately adjacent to that of Arnold Chait.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the petition to disinter Arnold Chait on condition that the respondents transfer to the petitioner title to the burial plot immediately adjacent to that of Arnold Chait (see, Matter of Fromm, 280 App Div 1022; Matter of McEvilly, 54 Misc 2d 602; Matter of Frost v St. Paul’s Cemetery Assn., 44 Misc 2d 589; Matter of Costa, 83 NYS2d 65, affd 274 App Div 872). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 259, 704 N.Y.S.2d 834, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2507, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chait-v-chait-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack