Dam v. Dam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dam v. Dam

268 A.D. 501, 51 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3202

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1944

StatusPublished

This text of 268 A.D. 501 (Dam v. Dam) 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

Dam v. Dam, 268 A.D. 501, 51 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3202 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The law is well settled that if a father fails to support his child, the wife may recover the reasonable amounts she has expended out of her separate estate in discharge of his obligation. (Laumeier v. Laumeier, 237 N. Y. 357, 364-365.) However, the'husband’s pecuniary ability may be an element to be considered if any question is raised as to the character of the expenditures for which the wife seeks- reimbursement. (De Brauwere v. De Brauwere, 203 N. Y. 460, 465.)

Plaintiff is claiming expenditures of $12,000 over a period of eight years for the support of defendant’s infant child. Whether the items involved are commensurate with defendant’s means, constitutes an issue of fact affecting the obligation of defendant to pay and if so, how much. There is a further issue of fact as to whether plaintiff supported the child without any expectation of reimbursement from defendant. (Swanton v. Curley, 273 N. Y. 325, 329; Whitton v. Schultz, 265 App. Div. 583, 585; Matter of Hamilton, 70 App. Div. 73,76, affd. 172 N. Y. 652; Bloch v. Ballin, 50 N. Y. S. 2d 732, 734.)

[502]*502The order should he reversed, but without costs, and the motion denied.

Martin, P. J., Tównley, Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur.

r Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and the motion .denied.

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

Per Curiam.

The law is well settled that if a father fails to support his child, the wife may recover the reasonable amounts she has expended out of her separate estate in discharge of his obligation. (Laumeier v. Laumeier, 237 N. Y. 357, 364-365.) However, the'husband’s pecuniary ability may be an element to be considered if any question is raised as to the character of the expenditures for which the wife seeks- reimbursement. (De Brauwere v. De Brauwere, 203 N. Y. 460, 465.)

Plaintiff is claiming expenditures of $12,000 over a period of eight years for the support of defendant’s infant child. Whether the items involved are commensurate with defendant’s means, constitutes an issue of fact affecting the obligation of defendant to pay and if so, how much. There is a further issue of fact as to whether plaintiff supported the child without any expectation of reimbursement from defendant. (Swanton v. Curley, 273 N. Y. 325, 329; Whitton v. Schultz, 265 App. Div. 583, 585; Matter of Hamilton, 70 App. Div. 73,76, affd. 172 N. Y. 652; Bloch v. Ballin, 50 N. Y. S. 2d 732, 734.)

[502]*502The order should he reversed, but without costs, and the motion denied.

Martin, P. J., Tównley, Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur.

r Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and the motion .denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D. 501, 51 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dam-v-dam-nyappdiv-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack