Shumin Zhao v. Lijun Li

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shumin Zhao v. Lijun Li

300 A.D.2d 169, 750 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12461

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

DecidedDecember 19, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 169 (Shumin Zhao v. Lijun Li) 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

Shumin Zhao v. Lijun Li, 300 A.D.2d 169, 750 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12461 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marjory Fields, J.), entered August 2, 2001, insofar as appealed from, granting plaintiff a divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s testimony demonstrated frequent and persisting serious misconduct, including spreading false rumors of extramarital affairs, that affected plaintiff’s physical and mental health, including loss of sleep and nervousness that caused him to lose his job, and was otherwise sufficient to warrant a finding of cruel and inhuman treatment, notwithstanding the lack of medical evidence (see Ridley v Ridley, 275 AD2d 941; Miller v Xiao Mei, 295 AD2d 144). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Ellerin, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marjory Fields, J.), entered August 2, 2001, insofar as appealed from, granting plaintiff a divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s testimony demonstrated frequent and persisting serious misconduct, including spreading false rumors of extramarital affairs, that affected plaintiff’s physical and mental health, including loss of sleep and nervousness that caused him to lose his job, and was otherwise sufficient to warrant a finding of cruel and inhuman treatment, notwithstanding the lack of medical evidence (see Ridley v Ridley, 275 AD2d 941; Miller v Xiao Mei, 295 AD2d 144). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Ellerin, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 169, 750 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shumin-zhao-v-lijun-li-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack