Roberts v. Roberts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roberts v. Roberts

2 A.D.2d 883, 156 N.Y.S.2d 385, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3865

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.2d 883 (Roberts v. Roberts) 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

Roberts v. Roberts, 2 A.D.2d 883, 156 N.Y.S.2d 385, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3865 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, so far as appealed from, and the order denying plaintiff’s motion to eliminate the provision for payment of alimony to defendant, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Upon the evidence adduced in this annulment action, in which plaintiff obtained judgment on the ground of a prior subsisting marriage by defendant, it cannot be said that the allowance of alimony to defendant, pursuant to the provisions of section 1140-a of the Civil Practice Act, did not constitute a valid exercise of discretion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Botein, Rabin, Prank and Yalente, JJ.

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

Judgment, so far as appealed from, and the order denying plaintiff’s motion to eliminate the provision for payment of alimony to defendant, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Upon the evidence adduced in this annulment action, in which plaintiff obtained judgment on the ground of a prior subsisting marriage by defendant, it cannot be said that the allowance of alimony to defendant, pursuant to the provisions of section 1140-a of the Civil Practice Act, did not constitute a valid exercise of discretion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Botein, Rabin, Prank and Yalente, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.2d 883, 156 N.Y.S.2d 385, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-v-roberts-nyappdiv-1956.