In re Supino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Supino

262 A.D. 775, 27 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5810

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

DecidedMay 26, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 775 (In re Supino) 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 Supino, 262 A.D. 775, 27 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5810 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County, made and entered August 5, 1940, dismissing application of appellants for removal of respondent Maccariello, as co-administrator, unanimously affirmed, with costs to said respondent, payable out of the estate. Appeal from order dated May 10, 1940, granting motion for reargument and on reargument adhering to original determination, dismissed, without costs. There is no such order in the record on appeal. In our opinion the proof was sufficient to warrant the finding that decedent and respondent Maccariello were husband and wife as the result of a common-law marriage, effective upon the removal of the impediment to such status by the death of Bartolomeo Supino in 1925. (Matter of Haffner, 254 N. Y. 238.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

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

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County, made and entered August 5, 1940, dismissing application of appellants for removal of respondent Maccariello, as co-administrator, unanimously affirmed, with costs to said respondent, payable out of the estate. Appeal from order dated May 10, 1940, granting motion for reargument and on reargument adhering to original determination, dismissed, without costs. There is no such order in the record on appeal. In our opinion the proof was sufficient to warrant the finding that decedent and respondent Maccariello were husband and wife as the result of a common-law marriage, effective upon the removal of the impediment to such status by the death of Bartolomeo Supino in 1925. (Matter of Haffner, 254 N. Y. 238.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 775, 27 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-supino-nyappdiv-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack