City of New York v. McCarthy

139 Misc. 746, 249 N.Y.S. 280, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1216
CourtNew York Court of Special Session
DecidedMarch 30, 1931
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 139 Misc. 746 (City of New York v. McCarthy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Special Session primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of New York v. McCarthy, 139 Misc. 746, 249 N.Y.S. 280, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1216 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1931).

Opinions

Salomon, J.

An order was made herein adjudging the defendant a disorderly person and directing him to pay eight dollars per week for the support of his wife.

Under the provisions of section 74 of the Inferior Criminal Courts Act (Laws of 1910, chap. 659, as amd. by Laws of 1919, chap. 339) a husband who fails to support his wife and there is danger that she may become a public charge is to be adjudged a disorderly person.

The testimony adduced before the magistrate in this case justified him in concluding that the complainant was incapacitated, unable to support herself and in danger of becoming a public charge.

It appears that the parties hereto have lived separate and apart for approximately twenty-five years and that several applications have been made to the Supreme Court by her for alimony, which [747]*747applications have been denied. Even though the parties hereto have lived separate and apart and the applications made to the Supreme Court were denied, nevertheless the defendant is the lawful husband of the complainant, and where it appears from credible testimony that the complainant, the wife of the defendant, is incapacitated and unable to support herself and that the defendant, her husband, neglects and fails to contribute towards her support, and she, therefore, is in danger of becoming a public charge, the defendant is legally bound under the law to support her at least to the extent of preventing her from becoming a burden upon the public.

The judgment herein adjudging the defendant a disorderly person and directing him to pay eight dollars per week towards support of the complainant is, therefore, affirmed.

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

Related

Campas v. Campas
61 Misc. 2d 49 (New York Family Court, 1969)
Kurtis v. De Siervo
46 Misc. 2d 1014 (New York County Courts, 1965)
Lebolt v. Lebolt
200 Misc. 704 (New York Family Court, 1951)
Bellanca v. Bellanca
199 Misc. 698 (New York Family Court, 1950)
Filicaza v. Filicaza
192 Misc. 76 (New York Family Court, 1948)
Cannon v. Cannon
190 Misc. 677 (New York Family Court, 1947)
Kenneson v. Kenneson
178 Misc. 832 (New York Family Court, 1942)
Jenkins v. Jenkins
179 Misc. 905 (New York Family Court, 1942)
City of New York v. Jansen
150 Misc. 268 (New York Court of Special Session, 1934)
In re the Estate of Tierney
148 Misc. 378 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1933)
City of New York v. Gatke
142 Misc. 564 (New York Court of Special Session, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 Misc. 746, 249 N.Y.S. 280, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-new-york-v-mccarthy-nyspecsessct-1931.