Edelstein v. Edelstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Edelstein v. Edelstein

26 A.D.2d 522, 271 N.Y.S.2d 589, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4047

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

DecidedJune 9, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 522 (Edelstein v. Edelstein) 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

Edelstein v. Edelstein, 26 A.D.2d 522, 271 N.Y.S.2d 589, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4047 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered March 1, 1966, unanimously modified on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of granting a hearing as to the changed needs of plaintiff and the change in circumstances of the parties since the date of the judgment of separation in 1955 and, as so modified, affirmed, with $30 costs and disbursements to abide the event. Should defendant stipulate that he is of sufficient financial ability to pay any reasonable sum which the court may find plaintiff to-be entitled to, then, in such event, the hearing ordered shall be restricted solely to the questions of plaintiff’s change in circumstances and needs. Concur — Botein, P. J., McNally, Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order, entered March 1, 1966, unanimously modified on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of granting a hearing as to the changed needs of plaintiff and the change in circumstances of the parties since the date of the judgment of separation in 1955 and, as so modified, affirmed, with $30 costs and disbursements to abide the event. Should defendant stipulate that he is of sufficient financial ability to pay any reasonable sum which the court may find plaintiff to-be entitled to, then, in such event, the hearing ordered shall be restricted solely to the questions of plaintiff’s change in circumstances and needs. Concur — Botein, P. J., McNally, Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 522, 271 N.Y.S.2d 589, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edelstein-v-edelstein-nyappdiv-1966.