In re the Estate of Balsam
This text of 275 A.D.2d 687 (In re the Estate of Balsam) 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.
Opinion
When prima facie proof of the validity of the Arkansas decree was produced by the moving party in support of the motion to strike out as sham the allegations respecting the invalidity of such divorce decree, it was the duty of appellant to come forward with proof to show that the allegations sought to be struck out were not, in fact, false. (Levy v. Jones, 269 App. Div. 295; Zwerdling v. Bent, 264 App. Div. 195; People v. McCumber, 18 N. Y. 315, 324-325.) In the absence of such proof, the motion to strike out as sham the allegations respecting the invalidity of the Arkansas divorce decree was properly granted. Nolan, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and MaeCrate, JJ., concur. [See post, p. 769.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
275 A.D.2d 687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-balsam-nyappdiv-1949.