Rowe v. Rowe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rowe v. Rowe

42 A.D.2d 830, 345 N.Y.S.2d 811, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3886

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

DecidedJuly 6, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 42 A.D.2d 830 (Rowe v. Rowe) 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

Rowe v. Rowe, 42 A.D.2d 830, 345 N.Y.S.2d 811, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs and a new trial granted. Memorandum : On this appeal from that part of an order which awarded custody of the two younger children of the parties to the father, there was insufficient proof to show that the father, who was living alone, could properly care for and supervise the children without assistance. His testimony that neighbors had volunteered to help him should be further developed. There should also be further proof of the physical condition, health and needs of the son, James, who sustained injuries in an accident after the date of the order appealed from. Proof should also be received concerning the needs of the eight-year-old daughter. (Appeal from part of order of Onondaga County Family Court, in custody proceeding.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Marsh, Witmer, Simons and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs and a new trial granted. Memorandum : On this appeal from that part of an order which awarded custody of the two younger children of the parties to the father, there was insufficient proof to show that the father, who was living alone, could properly care for and supervise the children without assistance. His testimony that neighbors had volunteered to help him should be further developed. There should also be further proof of the physical condition, health and needs of the son, James, who sustained injuries in an accident after the date of the order appealed from. Proof should also be received concerning the needs of the eight-year-old daughter. (Appeal from part of order of Onondaga County Family Court, in custody proceeding.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Marsh, Witmer, Simons and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.2d 830, 345 N.Y.S.2d 811, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowe-v-rowe-nyappdiv-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack