Lundquist v. Lundquist
184 A.D. 949
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 15, 1918
StatusPublished
This text of 184 A.D. 949 (Lundquist v. Lundquist) 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
Lundquist v. Lundquist, 184 A.D. 949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1918).
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Thomas, Mills and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Jenks, P. J., dissented upon the ground that the proof does not establish a ease within the rule of Kennedy v. Kennedy (73 N. Y. 369); Barber v. Barber (168 App. Div. 212), and Donohue v. Donohue (180 id. 561), with whom Blackmar, J., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Kennedy v. . Kennedy
73 N.Y. 369 (New York Court of Appeals, 1878)
Barber v. Barber
168 A.D. 212 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1915)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
184 A.D. 949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lundquist-v-lundquist-nyappdiv-1918.