Melnitzky v. Melnitzky

22 A.D.3d 298, 802 N.Y.S.2d 130

This text of 22 A.D.3d 298 (Melnitzky v. Melnitzky) 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
Melnitzky v. Melnitzky, 22 A.D.3d 298, 802 N.Y.S.2d 130 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith Gische, J.), entered July 13, 2004, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion to enforce payment of defendant’s child support arrears, and denied defendant’s cross motion to inspect certain safe deposit boxes prior to the auction of their contents, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant does not claim that he made any of the child support payments in issue, but instead claims that property stored in certain safe deposit boxes, which he would have used to make [299]*299the payments, was converted by plaintiff. The claim of conversion is vexatious and meritless (Melnitzky v Apple Bank for Sav., 19 AD3d 252 [2005]). We have considered and rejected defendant’s other arguments. Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Ellerin, Williams and McGuire, JJ.

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

Related

Melnitzky v. Apple Bank for Savings
19 A.D.3d 252 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 A.D.3d 298, 802 N.Y.S.2d 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melnitzky-v-melnitzky-nyappdiv-2005.