Olsen v. Olsen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Olsen v. Olsen

26 A.D.2d 584, 272 N.Y.S.2d 728, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891

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

DecidedJune 27, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 584 (Olsen v. Olsen) 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

Olsen v. Olsen, 26 A.D.2d 584, 272 N.Y.S.2d 728, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for separation in which a judgment of separation was granted to plaintiff-wife on October 29, 1964, defendant-husband appeals from an order of the .Supreme Court, Kings 'County, entered October 11, 1965, which, on his motion, modified the judgment as to his rights of visitation with .the child of the marriage and denied his motion insofar as it was to enforce “make-up” visits. Qrder reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion transferred to the Family Court, Kings County, for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. No questions of fact have been considered. Issues are raised in the moving and opposing affidavits .that may not properly be resolved without a hearing. It is not clear from the papers whether a full hearing was held in the court below or merely an informal conference. In any event, there are no minutes of any hearing in the record before us and, therefore, adequate review is impossible. Moreover, under all the circumstances [585]*585set forth in the filed papers, we believe .that a transfer to the Family Court is in order (cf. N. Y. Const., art. VI, § 13, subd. c; Family Court Act, §§ 467, 652; Sager v. Sager, 21 A D 2d 183). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for separation in which a judgment of separation was granted to plaintiff-wife on October 29, 1964, defendant-husband appeals from an order of the .Supreme Court, Kings 'County, entered October 11, 1965, which, on his motion, modified the judgment as to his rights of visitation with .the child of the marriage and denied his motion insofar as it was to enforce “make-up” visits. Qrder reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion transferred to the Family Court, Kings County, for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. No questions of fact have been considered. Issues are raised in the moving and opposing affidavits .that may not properly be resolved without a hearing. It is not clear from the papers whether a full hearing was held in the court below or merely an informal conference. In any event, there are no minutes of any hearing in the record before us and, therefore, adequate review is impossible. Moreover, under all the circumstances [585]*585set forth in the filed papers, we believe .that a transfer to the Family Court is in order (cf. N. Y. Const., art. VI, § 13, subd. c; Family Court Act, §§ 467, 652; Sager v. Sager, 21 A D 2d 183). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 584, 272 N.Y.S.2d 728, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olsen-v-olsen-nyappdiv-1966.