Hawthorne v. Hawthorne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hawthorne v. Hawthorne

23 A.D.2d 964, 261 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4143

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

DecidedMay 20, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 964 (Hawthorne v. Hawthorne) 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

Hawthorne v. Hawthorne, 23 A.D.2d 964, 261 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4143 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to either party, and matter remitted to Herkimer Special Term for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Memorandum: The affidavit submitted by the plaintiff-respondent was insufficient not only as to the extent of the allegations contained, but also as to factual allegations as distinguished from conclusions. It appeared upon the argument that the defendant-appellant, if given an opportunity, would be able to submit affidavits containing factual matters relating to the intention of the parties as to the effect and extent of the release, which could have a definite bearing upon the determination of the motion. The matter, therefore, is remitted to Special Term, Herkimer County, for reargument, with the privilege to each of the parties to submit additional affidavits, if so advised. (Appeal from an order of Herkimer Special Term, granting plaintiff’s motion to strike paragraph 3 of defendant’s answer.)— Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecehio, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to either party, and matter remitted to Herkimer Special Term for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Memorandum: The affidavit submitted by the plaintiff-respondent was insufficient not only as to the extent of the allegations contained, but also as to factual allegations as distinguished from conclusions. It appeared upon the argument that the defendant-appellant, if given an opportunity, would be able to submit affidavits containing factual matters relating to the intention of the parties as to the effect and extent of the release, which could have a definite bearing upon the determination of the motion. The matter, therefore, is remitted to Special Term, Herkimer County, for reargument, with the privilege to each of the parties to submit additional affidavits, if so advised. (Appeal from an order of Herkimer Special Term, granting plaintiff’s motion to strike paragraph 3 of defendant’s answer.)— Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecehio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 964, 261 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawthorne-v-hawthorne-nyappdiv-1965.