Gray v. Gray

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gray v. Gray

10 A.D.2d 946, 200 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9523

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

DecidedMay 31, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 10 A.D.2d 946 (Gray v. Gray) 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

Gray v. Gray, 10 A.D.2d 946, 200 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9523 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion to increase permanent alimony reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, and the motion granted to the extent of increasing the allowance to the wife from $32.50 to-$40 per week to commence from 10 days after service of the order herein with notice of entry thereof, without costs to either party. The record establishes, without serious dispute, that the husband’s income has increased and that the wife’s circumstances have worsened with the result that her condition is such as to require additional support. All concur except Stevens, J., who dissents and votes to affirm on the ground that the record does not establish a change in circumstances sufficiently substantial to warrant granting of the motion. Settle order. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, McNally and Noonan, JJ.

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

Order denying motion to increase permanent alimony reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, and the motion granted to the extent of increasing the allowance to the wife from $32.50 to-$40 per week to commence from 10 days after service of the order herein with notice of entry thereof, without costs to either party. The record establishes, without serious dispute, that the husband’s income has increased and that the wife’s circumstances have worsened with the result that her condition is such as to require additional support. All concur except Stevens, J., who dissents and votes to affirm on the ground that the record does not establish a change in circumstances sufficiently substantial to warrant granting of the motion. Settle order. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, McNally and Noonan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 A.D.2d 946, 200 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-gray-nyappdiv-1960.