Charles v. Charles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Charles v. Charles

44 A.D.2d 596, 354 N.Y.S.2d 590, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5382

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 44 A.D.2d 596 (Charles v. Charles) 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

Charles v. Charles, 44 A.D.2d 596, 354 N.Y.S.2d 590, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5382 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 15, 1972 after a nonjury trial, which (1) declared that a certain foreign judgment of divorce obtained by defendant in the State of Guyana is invalid and that plaintiff is the lawful wife of defendant and (2) granted plaintiff’s counsel a fee of $1,250; and plaintiff cross-appeals from so much .of the judgment as limited the counsel fee award to $1,250, inclusive of disbursements, and struck out a proposed provision to award her costs and disbursements of the action. Judgment modified, on the facts, by increasing the counsel fee award to $2,000. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiff. The counsel fee awarded to plaintiff by Special Term was inadequate to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 15, 1972 after a nonjury trial, which (1) declared that a certain foreign judgment of divorce obtained by defendant in the State of Guyana is invalid and that plaintiff is the lawful wife of defendant and (2) granted plaintiff’s counsel a fee of $1,250; and plaintiff cross-appeals from so much .of the judgment as limited the counsel fee award to $1,250, inclusive of disbursements, and struck out a proposed provision to award her costs and disbursements of the action. Judgment modified, on the facts, by increasing the counsel fee award to $2,000. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiff. The counsel fee awarded to plaintiff by Special Term was inadequate to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A.D.2d 596, 354 N.Y.S.2d 590, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-v-charles-nyappdiv-1974.