Gelep v. Gelep

New York Supreme Court

Gelep v. Gelep

52 Misc. 2d 64, 275 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1331

DecidedNovember 10, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 52 Misc. 2d 64 (Gelep v. Gelep) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gelep v. Gelep, 52 Misc. 2d 64, 275 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1331 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Lawrence H. Cooke, J.

In this action for an annulment, plaintiff moves “ for an order striking out defendant’s answer, and directing the entry of summary judgment for plaintiff upon the cause of action set forth in the complaint.”

In a matrimonial action, which includes one for annulment (CPLR 105, subd. [m]), a motion for summary judgment is available only to the defending party, based on documentary evidence or official records which establish the defense to the cause of action sufficiently to warrant the court as a matter of law in directing judgment, and the party seeking matrimonial relief cannot obtain it by summary judgment, even if he has documentary proof (CPLR 3212, subd. [d]; Jones v. Jones, 25 A D 2d 426, 427; Denberg v. Frischman, 24 A D 2d 100, affd. 17 N Y 2d 778; Roberts v. Roberts, 47 Misc 2d 41, 42-43; Brandstadter v. Brandstadter, 193 N. Y. S. 2d 687; Wachtell, New York Practice Under the CPLR, p. 175; 6 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice 2d, § 39:6; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 3212.08; Boardman’s New York Family Law, pp. 659-660). Motion denied.

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

Lawrence H. Cooke, J.

In this action for an annulment, plaintiff moves “ for an order striking out defendant’s answer, and directing the entry of summary judgment for plaintiff upon the cause of action set forth in the complaint.”

In a matrimonial action, which includes one for annulment (CPLR 105, subd. [m]), a motion for summary judgment is available only to the defending party, based on documentary evidence or official records which establish the defense to the cause of action sufficiently to warrant the court as a matter of law in directing judgment, and the party seeking matrimonial relief cannot obtain it by summary judgment, even if he has documentary proof (CPLR 3212, subd. [d]; Jones v. Jones, 25 A D 2d 426, 427; Denberg v. Frischman, 24 A D 2d 100, affd. 17 N Y 2d 778; Roberts v. Roberts, 47 Misc 2d 41, 42-43; Brandstadter v. Brandstadter, 193 N. Y. S. 2d 687; Wachtell, New York Practice Under the CPLR, p. 175; 6 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice 2d, § 39:6; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 3212.08; Boardman’s New York Family Law, pp. 659-660). Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 Misc. 2d 64, 275 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gelep-v-gelep-nysupct-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack