Ford v. Ford

261 A.D. 887, 25 N.Y.S.2d 6

Opinions

Per Curiam.

In view of the circumstances of this case, we think that the allowance made by the judge at Special Term was proper.

The order so far as appealed from should be affirmed.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Cohn, J., dissents.

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

Ford v. Ford, 261 A.D. 887, 25 N.Y.S.2d 6 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

261 A.D. 887 (Ford v. Ford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McCarthy v. . McCarthy
33 N.E. 550 (New York Court of Appeals, 1893)
Beadleston v. . Beadleston
8 N.E. 735 (New York Court of Appeals, 1886)
Greenberg v. Greenberg
134 A.D. 419 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1909)