Palumbo v. Curreri

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Palumbo v. Curreri

205 A.D.2d 516, 614 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5981

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

DecidedJune 6, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 516 (Palumbo v. Curreri) 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

Palumbo v. Curreri, 205 A.D.2d 516, 614 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5981 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that a common-law marriage existed between the parties pursuant to the laws of the State of Rhode Island, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Luciano, J.), dated September 25, 1992, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first through fifth causes of action, for dismissal of the plaintiff’s first and third affirmative defenses to the defendant’s counterclaims, and for preclusion pursuant to CPLR 3042 (c).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Luciano at the Supreme Court. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that a common-law marriage existed between the parties pursuant to the laws of the State of Rhode Island, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Luciano, J.), dated September 25, 1992, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first through fifth causes of action, for dismissal of the plaintiff’s first and third affirmative defenses to the defendant’s counterclaims, and for preclusion pursuant to CPLR 3042 (c).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Luciano at the Supreme Court. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 516, 614 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palumbo-v-curreri-nyappdiv-1994.