Concetto v. Concetto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Concetto v. Concetto

50 A.D.2d 883, 377 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11776

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 883 (Concetto v. Concetto) 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

Concetto v. Concetto, 50 A.D.2d 883, 377 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11776 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, the defendant wife appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 17, 1974, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia granted plaintiff a divorce. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by (1) deleting the first decretal paragraph thereof and substituting therefor a provision dismissing the complaint and (2) deleting the third decretal paragraph thereof and substituting therefor the following: "Ordered, adjudged and decreed that the question of support for defendant and for the male issue of the parties be reserved to the Family Court pursuant to the stipulation appearing in the record.” As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs, and action remitted to the Special Term for the making of a further determination as to counsel fees. The husband sued for a divorce upon the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. The proof, however, failed to establish that the name-calling and the two isolated acts of alleged violence, to which the husband testified, so endangered his [884]*884physical or mental well-being as to render it unsafe or improper for him to cohabit with his wife (Domestic Relations Law, § 170, subd [1]). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In a matrimonial action, the defendant wife appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 17, 1974, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia granted plaintiff a divorce. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by (1) deleting the first decretal paragraph thereof and substituting therefor a provision dismissing the complaint and (2) deleting the third decretal paragraph thereof and substituting therefor the following: "Ordered, adjudged and decreed that the question of support for defendant and for the male issue of the parties be reserved to the Family Court pursuant to the stipulation appearing in the record.” As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs, and action remitted to the Special Term for the making of a further determination as to counsel fees. The husband sued for a divorce upon the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. The proof, however, failed to establish that the name-calling and the two isolated acts of alleged violence, to which the husband testified, so endangered his [884]*884physical or mental well-being as to render it unsafe or improper for him to cohabit with his wife (Domestic Relations Law, § 170, subd [1]). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 883, 377 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/concetto-v-concetto-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack