Rusnack v. Rusnack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rusnack v. Rusnack

101 A.D.2d 831, 475 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18498

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

DecidedMay 14, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 101 A.D.2d 831 (Rusnack v. Rusnack) 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

Rusnack v. Rusnack, 101 A.D.2d 831, 475 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18498 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), dated May 25,1983, as denied his motion to eliminate or modify downward the alimony and child support provisions of an amended judgment of divorce between the parties, and (2) an order of the same court, dated July 8, 1983, as, upon renewal and reargument, adhered to the prior determination. K Appeal from the order dated May 25,1983 dismissed. That order was superseded by the order dated July 8,1983, made upon renewal and reargument. H Order dated July 8,1983, affirmed, insofar as appealed from. No opinion, f The respondent is awarded one bill of costs. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), dated May 25,1983, as denied his motion to eliminate or modify downward the alimony and child support provisions of an amended judgment of divorce between the parties, and (2) an order of the same court, dated July 8, 1983, as, upon renewal and reargument, adhered to the prior determination. K Appeal from the order dated May 25,1983 dismissed. That order was superseded by the order dated July 8,1983, made upon renewal and reargument. H Order dated July 8,1983, affirmed, insofar as appealed from. No opinion, f The respondent is awarded one bill of costs. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 A.D.2d 831, 475 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rusnack-v-rusnack-nyappdiv-1984.