In re Morris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Morris

245 A.D. 834

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1935

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D. 834 (In re Morris) 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

In re Morris, 245 A.D. 834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Upon appeal by petitioner from an order denying her application for a dissolution of her marriage pursuant to section 7-a of the Domestic Relations Law, the order is reversed on the law and the facts and the petition is granted. The court at Special Term denied petitioner’s application upon the ground that the husband stated that he was going to run away and did not intend to support the family, and upon this ground the court refused to presume that the husband is dead. We are of opinion that the petitioner’s testimony was sufficient upon which to ground an order dissolving the marriage. (See Matter of Lane, 232 App. Div. 690; Matter of Heilweil,, Id. 610.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Scudder, Tompkins and Johnston, JJ., concur.

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

Upon appeal by petitioner from an order denying her application for a dissolution of her marriage pursuant to section 7-a of the Domestic Relations Law, the order is reversed on the law and the facts and the petition is granted. The court at Special Term denied petitioner’s application upon the ground that the husband stated that he was going to run away and did not intend to support the family, and upon this ground the court refused to presume that the husband is dead. We are of opinion that the petitioner’s testimony was sufficient upon which to ground an order dissolving the marriage. (See Matter of Lane, 232 App. Div. 690; Matter of Heilweil,, Id. 610.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Scudder, Tompkins and Johnston, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D. 834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-morris-nyappdiv-1935.