Chayes v. Chayes

180 A.D.2d 566
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 25, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 180 A.D.2d 566 (Chayes v. Chayes) 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
Chayes v. Chayes, 180 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Myriam J. Altman, J.), entered September 17, 1991, which denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction prohibiting defendant from prosecuting an action against him in Massachusetts, and, upon a search of the record, dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The rule of comity forbids our courts from enjoining an action in a sister State "unless it is clearly shown that the suit sought to be enjoined was brought in bad faith, motivated by fraud or an intent to harass the party seeking an injunction, or if its purpose was to evade the law of the domicile of the parties” (Hyman Constr. Co. v Precision Walls, 132 AD2d [567]*567523, 526). No such showing has been made here. Defendant has merely invoked a Massachusetts law (Mass Gen L, ch 208, § 34) that, she believes, entitled her, as a Massachusetts domiciliary, to an assignment of an interest in the house in Massachusetts she began renting from defendant before the parties were divorced. Consequently, whether principles of res judicata and full faith and credit arising out of the New York judgment of divorce bar defendant from litigating the title to this Massachusetts property in a Massachusetts court is a question more appropriately addressed to the Massachusetts court. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

Related

Sarepa v. Pepsico, Inc.
225 A.D.2d 604 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Ackerman v. Ackerman
219 A.D.2d 515 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
180 A.D.2d 566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chayes-v-chayes-nyappdiv-1992.