Honorof v. Honorof

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Honorof v. Honorof

54 A.D.2d 959, 388 N.Y.S.2d 641, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14871

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

DecidedNovember 22, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 959 (Honorof v. Honorof) 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

Honorof v. Honorof, 54 A.D.2d 959, 388 N.Y.S.2d 641, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action in which the plaintiff wife was granted a judgment of divorce, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 21, 1976, which denied his motion to (1) separate "the Findings of Fact from the Conclusions of Law and Judgment”, (2) seal the "Findings of Fact” and (3) prohibit the use of the "Findings of Fact”, except upon further court order. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The defendant failed to show any reason to grant him protection other than that which is afforded by section 235 of the Domestic Relations Law. Although requesting an injunction, the defendant failed to satisfy the equitable prerequisites therefor. Finally, 22A NYCRR 699.9 does not provide a basis for sealing findings of facts or for enjoining the parties from using such findings. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello and Suozzi, JJ., concur.

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

In an action in which the plaintiff wife was granted a judgment of divorce, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 21, 1976, which denied his motion to (1) separate "the Findings of Fact from the Conclusions of Law and Judgment”, (2) seal the "Findings of Fact” and (3) prohibit the use of the "Findings of Fact”, except upon further court order. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The defendant failed to show any reason to grant him protection other than that which is afforded by section 235 of the Domestic Relations Law. Although requesting an injunction, the defendant failed to satisfy the equitable prerequisites therefor. Finally, 22A NYCRR 699.9 does not provide a basis for sealing findings of facts or for enjoining the parties from using such findings. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello and Suozzi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 959, 388 N.Y.S.2d 641, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/honorof-v-honorof-nyappdiv-1976.