Heely v. Heely

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heely v. Heely

48 A.D.2d 684, 371 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9714

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

DecidedMay 19, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 684 (Heely v. Heely) 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

Heely v. Heely, 48 A.D.2d 684, 371 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9714 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

The respective attorneys for the parties, on this appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 27, 1975, have agreed by written stipulation dated May 5, 1975, at a conference in this court, that said order be modified as follows: (1) by increasing the award of temporary alimony from $125 per week to $175 per week, the additional sum representing an allowance for medical expenses, same without prejudice to determination upon trial; and (2) by adding thereto a provision that the parties proceed to trial promptly and that the trial shall be of all the issues, including that of custody of the parties’ children. In accordance with the foregoing, the order is modified as so stipulated and, as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Martuscello and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

The respective attorneys for the parties, on this appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 27, 1975, have agreed by written stipulation dated May 5, 1975, at a conference in this court, that said order be modified as follows: (1) by increasing the award of temporary alimony from $125 per week to $175 per week, the additional sum representing an allowance for medical expenses, same without prejudice to determination upon trial; and (2) by adding thereto a provision that the parties proceed to trial promptly and that the trial shall be of all the issues, including that of custody of the parties’ children. In accordance with the foregoing, the order is modified as so stipulated and, as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Martuscello and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 684, 371 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9714, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heely-v-heely-nyappdiv-1975.