Lipton v. Shapiro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lipton v. Shapiro

27 A.D.2d 656, 278 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 27 A.D.2d 656 (Lipton v. Shapiro) 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

Lipton v. Shapiro, 27 A.D.2d 656, 278 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered June 8, 1966, herein appealed from, unanimously reversed, on the law without costs or disbursements to either party, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied. Triable issues exist which preclude the granting of summary judgment. Whether necessaries were in fact supplied, their fair and reasonable value, and additionally, whether necessaries were supplied or moneys advanced with a then existing expectation of payment, are all fact issues (16 N. Y. Jur., Domestic Relations, §§ 628, 629, 633, 635 et seq.; Wanamaker v. Weaver, 176 N. Y. 75; Swanton v. Curley, 273 N. Y. 325; Silkworth v. Silkworth, 255 App. Div. 226; Grishaver v. Grishaver, 225 N. Y. S. 2d 924). Liability of defendant for legal services rendered following upon an- award of counsel fees in the matrimonial proceeding also poses questions of fact and law (see Domestic Relations Law, §§ 237, 236, 240; 16 N. Y. Jur., Domestic Relations, § 672; Levine v. Levine, 48 Misc 2d 15, affd. 50 Misc 2d 39). Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Steuer, Tilzer and Rabin, JJ.

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

Order entered June 8, 1966, herein appealed from, unanimously reversed, on the law without costs or disbursements to either party, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied. Triable issues exist which preclude the granting of summary judgment. Whether necessaries were in fact supplied, their fair and reasonable value, and additionally, whether necessaries were supplied or moneys advanced with a then existing expectation of payment, are all fact issues (16 N. Y. Jur., Domestic Relations, §§ 628, 629, 633, 635 et seq.; Wanamaker v. Weaver, 176 N. Y. 75; Swanton v. Curley, 273 N. Y. 325; Silkworth v. Silkworth, 255 App. Div. 226; Grishaver v. Grishaver, 225 N. Y. S. 2d 924). Liability of defendant for legal services rendered following upon an- award of counsel fees in the matrimonial proceeding also poses questions of fact and law (see Domestic Relations Law, §§ 237, 236, 240; 16 N. Y. Jur., Domestic Relations, § 672; Levine v. Levine, 48 Misc 2d 15, affd. 50 Misc 2d 39). Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Steuer, Tilzer and Rabin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.2d 656, 278 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lipton-v-shapiro-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack