Reder v. Reder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reder v. Reder

200 A.D.2d 358, 608 N.Y.S.2d 66

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

DecidedJanuary 4, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 200 A.D.2d 358 (Reder v. Reder) 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

Reder v. Reder, 200 A.D.2d 358, 608 N.Y.S.2d 66 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline Silbermann, J.), entered January 27, 1993, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion for a money judgment representing unpaid child support and maintenance, unanimously affirmed, for the reasons stated by Silbermann, J., without costs or disbursements. We would add only that, in the circumstances of this case, defendant’s unilateral determination that the child was emancipated and his cessation of support were not improper. The provisions of the stipulation, which were incorporated into the judgment, are clear, and, as plaintiff all but concedes, an emancipation event, as defined by the agreement, occurred. Defendant’s support obligation was thereby eliminated, not merely reduced, and there was no need for further intervention by the court. (Johnston v Johnston, 115 AD2d 520, Matter of Launder o Plastique, 84 Misc 2d 551, 553-554.) The judgment became self-executing. (Cf, supra.) Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach and Asch, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline Silbermann, J.), entered January 27, 1993, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion for a money judgment representing unpaid child support and maintenance, unanimously affirmed, for the reasons stated by Silbermann, J., without costs or disbursements. We would add only that, in the circumstances of this case, defendant’s unilateral determination that the child was emancipated and his cessation of support were not improper. The provisions of the stipulation, which were incorporated into the judgment, are clear, and, as plaintiff all but concedes, an emancipation event, as defined by the agreement, occurred. Defendant’s support obligation was thereby eliminated, not merely reduced, and there was no need for further intervention by the court. (Johnston v Johnston, 115 AD2d 520, Matter of Launder o Plastique, 84 Misc 2d 551, 553-554.) The judgment became self-executing. (Cf, supra.) Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 358, 608 N.Y.S.2d 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reder-v-reder-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack