Gomez v. Gomez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gomez v. Gomez

222 A.D.2d 650, 636 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13977

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 222 A.D.2d 650 (Gomez v. Gomez) 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

Gomez v. Gomez, 222 A.D.2d 650, 636 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13977 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated por[651]*651tions of (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kitson, J.), entered July 29, 1993, and (2) an order of the same court, entered June 13,1994, which, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the judgment was superseded by the order entered June 13, 1994, upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered June 13, 1994, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, for reasons stated by Justice Kitson at the Supreme Court. Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated por[651]*651tions of (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kitson, J.), entered July 29, 1993, and (2) an order of the same court, entered June 13,1994, which, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the judgment was superseded by the order entered June 13, 1994, upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered June 13, 1994, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, for reasons stated by Justice Kitson at the Supreme Court. Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 650, 636 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13977, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gomez-v-gomez-nyappdiv-1995.