Goss v. Kronheim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Goss v. Kronheim

74 A.D.2d 625, 424 N.Y.S.2d 877, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10285

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

DecidedFebruary 19, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 74 A.D.2d 625 (Goss v. Kronheim) 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

Goss v. Kronheim, 74 A.D.2d 625, 424 N.Y.S.2d 877, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10285 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act to obtain an upward modification of the child support provisions contained in a separation agreement petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated March 8, 1979, which dismissed her petition. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and without prejudice to the petitioner instituting a new proceeding for similar relief, if she be so advised. We find nothing improper in the Family Court’s denial of the instant application. However, under the circumstances disclosed by this record, it is our view that petitioner should not be barred from instituting a new proceeding for similar relief and obtaining a determination thereof on the merits. Hopkins, J. P., Laser, Mangano and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to article 4 of the Family Court Act to obtain an upward modification of the child support provisions contained in a separation agreement petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County, dated March 8, 1979, which dismissed her petition. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and without prejudice to the petitioner instituting a new proceeding for similar relief, if she be so advised. We find nothing improper in the Family Court’s denial of the instant application. However, under the circumstances disclosed by this record, it is our view that petitioner should not be barred from instituting a new proceeding for similar relief and obtaining a determination thereof on the merits. Hopkins, J. P., Laser, Mangano and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D.2d 625, 424 N.Y.S.2d 877, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goss-v-kronheim-nyappdiv-1980.