Cramer v. Cramer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cramer v. Cramer

140 A.D.2d 990, 529 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5836

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 27, 1988·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

CPLR 5241 was enacted to provide an expeditious method of enforcing support orders but it did not intend to "eliminate the due process rights of a judgment debtor (see, Shutt v Shutt, 133 Misc 2d 81, 82-83). Thus, while defendant’s asserted "mistake of fact” is not specifically within that statutory definition (CPLR 5241 [a] [8]), an income execution is not justified in this case because plaintiff’s attorneys failed to comply with the notice and levy requirements of the statute (see, Shutt v Shutt, supra, at 84). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Francis, J. — income execution.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Green, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

CPLR 5241 was enacted to provide an expeditious method of enforcing support orders but it did not intend to "eliminate the due process rights of a judgment debtor (see, Shutt v Shutt, 133 Misc 2d 81, 82-83). Thus, while defendant’s asserted "mistake of fact” is not specifically within that statutory definition (CPLR 5241 [a] [8]), an income execution is not justified in this case because plaintiff’s attorneys failed to comply with the notice and levy requirements of the statute (see, Shutt v Shutt, supra, at 84). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Francis, J. — income execution.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Green, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cramer v. Cramer, 140 A.D.2d 990, 529 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

140 A.D.2d 990 (Cramer v. Cramer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related