Gordon v. Gordon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gordon v. Gordon

1 A.D.2d 828, 149 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6431

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 828 (Gordon v. Gordon) 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

Gordon v. Gordon, 1 A.D.2d 828, 149 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6431 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Respondent moved to punish appellant, an attorney, for contempt for failure to make payments of alimony, as directed by a final decree of divorce. Appellant cross-moved for relief pursuant to section 1172-a of the Civil Practice Act, and both motions have been referred to an Official Referee. The appeal is from an order denying appellant’s motion to strike from a subpoena duces tecum a provision directing him to produce before the Official Referee “files of all eases in which you [appellant] or Gordon & Kass were or are attorneys of record or counsel from January 1, 1954 to date”. Appellant claimed privilege pursuant to section 353 of the Civil Practice Act. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Murphy, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Respondent moved to punish appellant, an attorney, for contempt for failure to make payments of alimony, as directed by a final decree of divorce. Appellant cross-moved for relief pursuant to section 1172-a of the Civil Practice Act, and both motions have been referred to an Official Referee. The appeal is from an order denying appellant’s motion to strike from a subpoena duces tecum a provision directing him to produce before the Official Referee “files of all eases in which you [appellant] or Gordon & Kass were or are attorneys of record or counsel from January 1, 1954 to date”. Appellant claimed privilege pursuant to section 353 of the Civil Practice Act. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Murphy, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 828, 149 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-gordon-nyappdiv-1956.