Cohen v. Kosch

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. Kosch

196 Misc. 1057, 93 N.Y.S.2d 832, 1949 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3009

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 17, 1949

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 196 Misc. 1057 (Cohen v. Kosch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cohen v. Kosch, 196 Misc. 1057, 93 N.Y.S.2d 832, 1949 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3009 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Legal services rendered for a wife or child are necessaries as a matter of law (Dravecka v. Richard, 267 N. Y. 180). Becovery may not be had for services rendered to a child where the liability of the father has been fixed in a matrimonial decree (Karminski v. Karminski, 260 App. Div. 491). However, in this case the father retained the child contrary to the custody provisions of the matrimonial decree necessitating a habeas corpus proceeding against him. That proceeding was determined adversely to the father and the child returned to the mother, in accordance with the terms of the matrimonial decree. The affirmative action taken by the father caused- retention of plaintiff as counsel in the habeas corpus [1058]*1058proceedings. Under such circumstances, an attorney may maintain an action for services rendered.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff, and cause remanded for assessment of damages.

Appeal from order dismissed.

Pécora, Eder and Hecht, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

Legal services rendered for a wife or child are necessaries as a matter of law (Dravecka v. Richard, 267 N. Y. 180). Becovery may not be had for services rendered to a child where the liability of the father has been fixed in a matrimonial decree (Karminski v. Karminski, 260 App. Div. 491). However, in this case the father retained the child contrary to the custody provisions of the matrimonial decree necessitating a habeas corpus proceeding against him. That proceeding was determined adversely to the father and the child returned to the mother, in accordance with the terms of the matrimonial decree. The affirmative action taken by the father caused- retention of plaintiff as counsel in the habeas corpus [1058]*1058proceedings. Under such circumstances, an attorney may maintain an action for services rendered.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff, and cause remanded for assessment of damages.

Appeal from order dismissed.

Pécora, Eder and Hecht, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 Misc. 1057, 93 N.Y.S.2d 832, 1949 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3009, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-kosch-nyappterm-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack