Levine v. Levine

New York Supreme Court

Levine v. Levine

145 Misc. 818, 260 N.Y.S. 258, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1584

DecidedNovember 9, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 145 Misc. 818 (Levine v. Levine) 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

Levine v. Levine, 145 Misc. 818, 260 N.Y.S. 258, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1584 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Foster, J.

Motion to punish the defendant for contempt in failing to pay alimony and counsel fees, in accordance with an order of this court made on the 3d day of September, 1932. After this order was granted, the parties composed their differences and commenced living together again, and on or about the 15th day of September, 1932, the plaintiff apparently discharged her attorneys.

This proceeding, although in the name of the action, is brought on by the plaintiff’s former attorneys. While I appreciate their predicament, I can find no authority for such procedure. The only cases similar to this which I have been able to find are cases in which one of the parties sought relief, and these were decided upon the theory that such party had a vested interest in the amount fixed by the court.

The motion is denied, without costs.

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

Foster, J.

Motion to punish the defendant for contempt in failing to pay alimony and counsel fees, in accordance with an order of this court made on the 3d day of September, 1932. After this order was granted, the parties composed their differences and commenced living together again, and on or about the 15th day of September, 1932, the plaintiff apparently discharged her attorneys.

This proceeding, although in the name of the action, is brought on by the plaintiff’s former attorneys. While I appreciate their predicament, I can find no authority for such procedure. The only cases similar to this which I have been able to find are cases in which one of the parties sought relief, and these were decided upon the theory that such party had a vested interest in the amount fixed by the court.

The motion is denied, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 Misc. 818, 260 N.Y.S. 258, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levine-v-levine-nysupct-1932.