Huss v. Huss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Huss v. Huss

20 A.D.2d 631, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4500

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 631 (Huss v. Huss) 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

Huss v. Huss, 20 A.D.2d 631, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4500 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for resettlement granted to the extent of changing the decretal portion of the order so as to conform in substance with the following: “It is unanimously ordered that the order [632]*632as appealed * * * is hereby reversed * * * defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment granted * * * and the clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant dismissing the complaint, with costs, severing defendant’s counterclaim and remanding the same to the Supreme Court, New York County, for an accounting by plaintiff of all rents and profits received by him and the disbursements made by him in connection with the jointly owned property in California and that upon the determination of the amount due plaintiff under such account the clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for said amount for her interest in the said property, with costs.” Settle order on notice. The order of this court entered on January 28, 1964 is vacated. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Eager, JJ.

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

Motion for resettlement granted to the extent of changing the decretal portion of the order so as to conform in substance with the following: “It is unanimously ordered that the order [632]*632as appealed * * * is hereby reversed * * * defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment granted * * * and the clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant dismissing the complaint, with costs, severing defendant’s counterclaim and remanding the same to the Supreme Court, New York County, for an accounting by plaintiff of all rents and profits received by him and the disbursements made by him in connection with the jointly owned property in California and that upon the determination of the amount due plaintiff under such account the clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for said amount for her interest in the said property, with costs.” Settle order on notice. The order of this court entered on January 28, 1964 is vacated. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 631, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huss-v-huss-nyappdiv-1964.