Nichols v. Nichols

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nichols v. Nichols

3 A.D.2d 736, 160 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6263

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

DecidedMarch 12, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 736 (Nichols v. Nichols) 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

Nichols v. Nichols, 3 A.D.2d 736, 160 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6263 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant claims that he is without funds and has no income. The record before us, however, does not disclose the detailed facts with respect to his assets and finances. Nor is anything shown with respect to his efforts, ability and good faith in attempting to earn an income. In order to determine whether or not he has been guilty of a willful contempt of court it is necessary that proof be adduced on all of these matters. Accordingly the matter should be sent to an Official Referee for the purpose of taking such testimony. Order unanimously modified as indicated above and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice. Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein, Rabin and Prank, JJ.

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

Defendant claims that he is without funds and has no income. The record before us, however, does not disclose the detailed facts with respect to his assets and finances. Nor is anything shown with respect to his efforts, ability and good faith in attempting to earn an income. In order to determine whether or not he has been guilty of a willful contempt of court it is necessary that proof be adduced on all of these matters. Accordingly the matter should be sent to an Official Referee for the purpose of taking such testimony. Order unanimously modified as indicated above and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice. Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein, Rabin and Prank, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 736, 160 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nichols-v-nichols-nyappdiv-1957.