Home/New York Court of Appeals/Lind v. Lind

Lind v. Lind

447 N.E.2d 72, 58 N.Y.2d 965, 460 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 2905
New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 23, 1983·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

That court properly resolved the factual disputes before it in the causes of action for separation and divorce (see Hessen v Hessen, 33 NY2d 406, 408) and it not appearing that that court abused its discretion or committed an error of law, its determinations of alimony, counsel fees and the use of the marital property are beyond our review (see Patron v Patron, 40 NY2d 582, 585).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg, Meyer and Simons concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Lind v. Lind, 447 N.E.2d 72, 58 N.Y.2d 965, 460 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 2905 (N.Y. 1983).

447 N.E.2d 72 (Lind v. Lind) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Soldinger v. Soldinger
21 A.D.3d 469 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Relyea v. Relyea
2 A.D.3d 1176 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Haymes v. Haymes
221 A.D.2d 73 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Emanuele v. Emanuele
218 A.D.2d 726 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Warshaw v. Warshaw
169 A.D.2d 408 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
Krishnan v. Krishnan
166 A.D.2d 357 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Wilbur v. Wilbur
116 A.D.2d 953 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Melnick v. Melnick
115 A.D.2d 416 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Murphy v. Murphy
110 A.D.2d 688 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)