Ellingsen v. Ellingsen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ellingsen v. Ellingsen

283 A.D. 1070, 131 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6345

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

DecidedJune 7, 1954

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D. 1070 (Ellingsen v. Ellingsen) 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

Ellingsen v. Ellingsen, 283 A.D. 1070, 131 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6345 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant appeals from a judgment, which, among other things, granted plaintiff a separation, awarded her custody of their child and directed him to pay $20 a week for the support of plaintiff and the child, and dismissed his counterclaim; from so much of an order made on the 11th day of December, 1953, as denied his motion for relief from a previous order which adjudged him in contempt of court for failure to comply with the provisions of an order directing him to pay temporary alimony and a counsel fee; from a further order made on the 23d day of December, 1953, granting his motion to reargue the said motion for relief from the order adjudging him in contempt, but adhering to the original determination; and from the two respective decisions which were rendered upon the said motions. Judgment and order of December 23, 1953, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Ho opinion. Appeals from the order of December 11, 1953, and from the decisions dismissed, without costs. In view of our determination with respect to the order of December 23, 1953, it is unnecessary to pass upon the order of December .11, 1953. Ho appeal lies from a decision. ¡Present — Adel, Acting P. J., Wenzel, MaeCrate, Beldoek and Murphy, JJ.

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

Defendant appeals from a judgment, which, among other things, granted plaintiff a separation, awarded her custody of their child and directed him to pay $20 a week for the support of plaintiff and the child, and dismissed his counterclaim; from so much of an order made on the 11th day of December, 1953, as denied his motion for relief from a previous order which adjudged him in contempt of court for failure to comply with the provisions of an order directing him to pay temporary alimony and a counsel fee; from a further order made on the 23d day of December, 1953, granting his motion to reargue the said motion for relief from the order adjudging him in contempt, but adhering to the original determination; and from the two respective decisions which were rendered upon the said motions. Judgment and order of December 23, 1953, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Ho opinion. Appeals from the order of December 11, 1953, and from the decisions dismissed, without costs. In view of our determination with respect to the order of December 23, 1953, it is unnecessary to pass upon the order of December .11, 1953. Ho appeal lies from a decision. ¡Present — Adel, Acting P. J., Wenzel, MaeCrate, Beldoek and Murphy, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 1070, 131 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ellingsen-v-ellingsen-nyappdiv-1954.