Gondelman v. Gondelman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gondelman v. Gondelman

75 A.D.2d 575, 426 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10991

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

DecidedApril 7, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 75 A.D.2d 575 (Gondelman v. Gondelman) 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

Gondelman v. Gondelman, 75 A.D.2d 575, 426 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10991 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, defendant appeals from an order and a resettled order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 11, 1978 and September 11, 1979, respectively, each of which, inter alia, directed him to furnish a financial disclosure statement similar to the one provided for by section 250 of the Domestic Relations Law. Appeal from order dismissed, without costs or disbursements. Said order was superseded by the resettled order. Resettled order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiff is entitled to the disclosure she seeks (see Ponard v Ponard, 52 AD2d 564; Perse v Perse, 52 AD2d 60; Schneiderman v Schneiderman, 51 AD2d 914). Damiani, J. P., Margett, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a matrimonial action, defendant appeals from an order and a resettled order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 11, 1978 and September 11, 1979, respectively, each of which, inter alia, directed him to furnish a financial disclosure statement similar to the one provided for by section 250 of the Domestic Relations Law. Appeal from order dismissed, without costs or disbursements. Said order was superseded by the resettled order. Resettled order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiff is entitled to the disclosure she seeks (see Ponard v Ponard, 52 AD2d 564; Perse v Perse, 52 AD2d 60; Schneiderman v Schneiderman, 51 AD2d 914). Damiani, J. P., Margett, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 A.D.2d 575, 426 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10991, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gondelman-v-gondelman-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack