Freimuth v. Freimuth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Freimuth v. Freimuth

23 A.D.2d 862, 259 N.Y.S.2d 266, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4231

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

DecidedMay 10, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 862 (Freimuth v. Freimuth) 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

Freimuth v. Freimuth, 23 A.D.2d 862, 259 N.Y.S.2d 266, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4231 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action for a judicial separation, the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 20, 1964 after a nonjury trial, upon the court’s formal decision, granting the plaintiff wife a separation, as directed the husband to pay to her permanent alimony of $50 a week, commencing January 30, 1964. Judgment modified on the facts by amending its second decretal paragraph so as to direct the husband to pay to the wife permanent alimony of $25 a week, retroactive to January 30, 1964. As so modified, the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs, and without prejudice to any future application with respect to the amount of the alimony, as indicated herein. The fifth finding of fact in the court’s decision is modified accordingly. In our opinion, in the light of the present relative financial circumstances of the parties and their respective earning potential, an alimony award of $25 a week is fair and appropriate (cf. Phillips v. Phillips, 1 A D 2d 393, [863]*863395-396, ail’d. 2 N Y 2d 742; Sachnoff v. Sachnoff, 6 A D 2d 879, affid. 7 N Y 2d 771). This determination is made on the. basis of the facts as they currently exist and is without prejudice to a subsequent motion based upon a showing of a subsequent change in the circumstances of the parties. Christ, Acting P. J., Hill, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Rabin, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment without modification.

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

— In an action for a judicial separation, the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 20, 1964 after a nonjury trial, upon the court’s formal decision, granting the plaintiff wife a separation, as directed the husband to pay to her permanent alimony of $50 a week, commencing January 30, 1964. Judgment modified on the facts by amending its second decretal paragraph so as to direct the husband to pay to the wife permanent alimony of $25 a week, retroactive to January 30, 1964. As so modified, the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs, and without prejudice to any future application with respect to the amount of the alimony, as indicated herein. The fifth finding of fact in the court’s decision is modified accordingly. In our opinion, in the light of the present relative financial circumstances of the parties and their respective earning potential, an alimony award of $25 a week is fair and appropriate (cf. Phillips v. Phillips, 1 A D 2d 393, [863]*863395-396, ail’d. 2 N Y 2d 742; Sachnoff v. Sachnoff, 6 A D 2d 879, affid. 7 N Y 2d 771). This determination is made on the. basis of the facts as they currently exist and is without prejudice to a subsequent motion based upon a showing of a subsequent change in the circumstances of the parties. Christ, Acting P. J., Hill, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Rabin, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment without modification.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 862, 259 N.Y.S.2d 266, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freimuth-v-freimuth-nyappdiv-1965.