Sperling v. Sperling

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sperling v. Sperling

29 A.D.2d 778, 290 N.Y.S.2d 166, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4548

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 778 (Sperling v. Sperling) 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

Sperling v. Sperling, 29 A.D.2d 778, 290 N.Y.S.2d 166, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4548 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Family Court, County of Nassau, dated April 10, 1967, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. ' Order of the Family Court, County of Nassau, dated March 15, 1967, modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by striking out the third decretal paragraph and inserting in its place a paragraph providing: “ Ordered that the respon[779]*779sibility for the payment of taxes assessable upon the sums received hereunder by the daughters of the parties shall be the responsibility of the respondent and all other provisions of the separation agreement of April 21, 1958 shall remain in effect.” As so modified, order affirmed, with costs to appellant. In our opinion, respondent’s economic status justifies the imposition upon him of the payment of the taxes assessable upon the sums awarded for support of his daughters in the order dated March 15, 1967. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Order of the Family Court, County of Nassau, dated April 10, 1967, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. ' Order of the Family Court, County of Nassau, dated March 15, 1967, modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by striking out the third decretal paragraph and inserting in its place a paragraph providing: “ Ordered that the respon[779]*779sibility for the payment of taxes assessable upon the sums received hereunder by the daughters of the parties shall be the responsibility of the respondent and all other provisions of the separation agreement of April 21, 1958 shall remain in effect.” As so modified, order affirmed, with costs to appellant. In our opinion, respondent’s economic status justifies the imposition upon him of the payment of the taxes assessable upon the sums awarded for support of his daughters in the order dated March 15, 1967. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 778, 290 N.Y.S.2d 166, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sperling-v-sperling-nyappdiv-1968.