Lau v. Lau

New York Supreme Court

Lau v. Lau

154 N.Y.S. 107

DecidedJune 20, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 154 N.Y.S. 107 (Lau v. Lau) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lau v. Lau, 154 N.Y.S. 107 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

BENEDICT, J.

In this action f,or a separation'plaintiff admits that prior to her marriage with the defendant she went through a marriage ceremony with another man, with whom, she testifies, she never lived, and from whom she has not obtained a divorce. Subsequently the defendant married her with full knowledge, as she testifies, of the circumstances above recited, and she thereafter lived with him for many years, and bore him four children, most, of whom are of full age. The admissions of the defendant are not sufficient, in my opinion, that the prior marriage was valid, and it does not therefore constitute a bar to the maintenance of this action. Matter of Meehan, 150 App. Div. 681, 135 N. Y. Supp. 723; Matter of Grande, 80 Misc. Rep. 450, 141 N. Y. Supp. 535.

The motion to dismiss the complaint is denied, and I will hear the defendant’s evidence on Saturday, June 27, 1914, at 10 o’clock a. m. The defendant will, of course, be at liberty to introduce proof to show that at the time he married plaintiff she was the lawful wife of another. All that I now hold is that the evidence heretofore adduced is not sufficient for that purpose.

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

BENEDICT, J.

In this action f,or a separation'plaintiff admits that prior to her marriage with the defendant she went through a marriage ceremony with another man, with whom, she testifies, she never lived, and from whom she has not obtained a divorce. Subsequently the defendant married her with full knowledge, as she testifies, of the circumstances above recited, and she thereafter lived with him for many years, and bore him four children, most, of whom are of full age. The admissions of the defendant are not sufficient, in my opinion, that the prior marriage was valid, and it does not therefore constitute a bar to the maintenance of this action. Matter of Meehan, 150 App. Div. 681, 135 N. Y. Supp. 723; Matter of Grande, 80 Misc. Rep. 450, 141 N. Y. Supp. 535.

The motion to dismiss the complaint is denied, and I will hear the defendant’s evidence on Saturday, June 27, 1914, at 10 o’clock a. m. The defendant will, of course, be at liberty to introduce proof to show that at the time he married plaintiff she was the lawful wife of another. All that I now hold is that the evidence heretofore adduced is not sufficient for that purpose.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 N.Y.S. 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lau-v-lau-nysupct-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack