Karetny v. Karetny

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Karetny v. Karetny

283 A.D.2d 250, 724 N.Y.S.2d 410, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5054

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

DecidedMay 15, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 283 A.D.2d 250 (Karetny v. Karetny) 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

Karetny v. Karetny, 283 A.D.2d 250, 724 N.Y.S.2d 410, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered on or about May 3, 2000, which, after a hearing, denied plaintiff’s motion to enforce that part of his stipulation of settlement with defendant, incorporated but not merged into their judgment of divorce, as provides for the education of their child through high school only in an Orthodox Jewish yeshiva, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record supports findings that the child has Tourette’s Syndrome, a neurological disorder aggravated by stress, that [251]*251the child’s symptoms diminished considerably once defendant took her out of the yeshiva she had been attending for three years and enrolled her in public school, that the longer school day at yeshiva is a source of stress for the child, and that adherence to the stipulation is therefore not in the child’s best interests (see, Gruber v Gruber, 87 AD2d 246, 250). Concur— Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Ellerin, Lerner and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered on or about May 3, 2000, which, after a hearing, denied plaintiff’s motion to enforce that part of his stipulation of settlement with defendant, incorporated but not merged into their judgment of divorce, as provides for the education of their child through high school only in an Orthodox Jewish yeshiva, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record supports findings that the child has Tourette’s Syndrome, a neurological disorder aggravated by stress, that [251]*251the child’s symptoms diminished considerably once defendant took her out of the yeshiva she had been attending for three years and enrolled her in public school, that the longer school day at yeshiva is a source of stress for the child, and that adherence to the stipulation is therefore not in the child’s best interests (see, Gruber v Gruber, 87 AD2d 246, 250). Concur— Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Ellerin, Lerner and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 250, 724 N.Y.S.2d 410, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/karetny-v-karetny-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack