Salmon v. Salmon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Salmon v. Salmon

235 A.D. 629, 254 N.Y.S. 1059

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 235 A.D. 629 (Salmon v. Salmon) 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

Salmon v. Salmon, 235 A.D. 629, 254 N.Y.S. 1059 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying, on reargument, plaintiff’s motion to modify final judgment of divorce reversed on the facts, without costs, and the matter remitted to the Special Term for a further hearing as to the true financial condition of the defendant. We are not satisfied that the amount found by the official referee as the net income of the defendant for the years 1927 — 1930, inclusive, is correct. It seems doubtful from the record whether the copartners, during this period, expended the amount allowed by the official referee for traveling expenses and maintenance charges. We think a more thorough investigation of this subject should be made. Lazansky, P. J,. Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying, on reargument, plaintiff’s motion to modify final judgment of divorce reversed on the facts, without costs, and the matter remitted to the Special Term for a further hearing as to the true financial condition of the defendant. We are not satisfied that the amount found by the official referee as the net income of the defendant for the years 1927 — 1930, inclusive, is correct. It seems doubtful from the record whether the copartners, during this period, expended the amount allowed by the official referee for traveling expenses and maintenance charges. We think a more thorough investigation of this subject should be made. Lazansky, P. J,. Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D. 629, 254 N.Y.S. 1059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salmon-v-salmon-nyappdiv-1932.