Goldman v. Goldman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Goldman v. Goldman

144 A.D.2d 315, 535 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11989

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

DecidedNovember 29, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 144 A.D.2d 315 (Goldman v. Goldman) 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

Goldman v. Goldman, 144 A.D.2d 315, 535 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Kristin Booth Glen, J.) entered on or about September 22, 1987, which upheld the validity of a reconciliation agreement between the decedent husband, Sol Goldman, and the plaintiff wife, Lillian Goldman, and order of the same court, entered April 28, 1988, which denied a postmortem motion for "clarification and modification” of the judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Any advisory language contained in Justice Glen’s opinion with regard to the enforceability of the reconciliation agreement against the estate is not to be construed as a legal finding adopted by this court. Concur — Carro, J. P., Asch, Milonas and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Kristin Booth Glen, J.) entered on or about September 22, 1987, which upheld the validity of a reconciliation agreement between the decedent husband, Sol Goldman, and the plaintiff wife, Lillian Goldman, and order of the same court, entered April 28, 1988, which denied a postmortem motion for "clarification and modification” of the judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Any advisory language contained in Justice Glen’s opinion with regard to the enforceability of the reconciliation agreement against the estate is not to be construed as a legal finding adopted by this court. Concur — Carro, J. P., Asch, Milonas and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 A.D.2d 315, 535 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldman-v-goldman-nyappdiv-1988.