Keiler v. Keiler

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Keiler v. Keiler

13 Misc. 2d 441, 180 N.Y.S.2d 564, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3112

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 17, 1958

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 13 Misc. 2d 441 (Keiler v. Keiler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Keiler v. Keiler, 13 Misc. 2d 441, 180 N.Y.S.2d 564, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3112 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and the facts and new trial granted, with $30 costs to plaintiff to abide the event. Appeal from “directed verdict ’ ’ dismissed; no appeal lies therefrom. The evidence presented a question of fact which should have been submitted to the jury as to whether, under all of the circumstances here present, it was plaintiff’s intention to waive her rights under the separation agreement by the commencement of the action [442]*442for separation (Hettich v. Hettich, 304 N. Y. 8; Schmelzel v. Schmelzel, 287 N. Y. 21; Galusha v. Galusha, 116 N. Y. 635; Goldman v. Goldman, 282 N. Y. 296). It was therefore error to direct a verdict in favor of defendant.'

Concur- — - Pette, Hast and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and the facts and new trial granted, with $30 costs to plaintiff to abide the event. Appeal from “directed verdict ’ ’ dismissed; no appeal lies therefrom. The evidence presented a question of fact which should have been submitted to the jury as to whether, under all of the circumstances here present, it was plaintiff’s intention to waive her rights under the separation agreement by the commencement of the action [442]*442for separation (Hettich v. Hettich, 304 N. Y. 8; Schmelzel v. Schmelzel, 287 N. Y. 21; Galusha v. Galusha, 116 N. Y. 635; Goldman v. Goldman, 282 N. Y. 296). It was therefore error to direct a verdict in favor of defendant.'

Concur- — - Pette, Hast and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Misc. 2d 441, 180 N.Y.S.2d 564, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keiler-v-keiler-nyappterm-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack