Srebnick v. Srebnick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Srebnick v. Srebnick

32 A.D.2d 972, 303 N.Y.S.2d 498, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3366

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

DecidedJuly 14, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.2d 972 (Srebnick v. Srebnick) 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

Srebnick v. Srebnick, 32 A.D.2d 972, 303 N.Y.S.2d 498, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3366 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated February 18, 1969, as, on reargument, (1) adhered to the original decision adjudging him in contempt of court and (2) provided for the making of a new order of commitment. Order dated [973]*973February 18, 1969, affirmed insofar as appealed from. No opinion. Appeal from order of the same court dated November 25, 1968 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order made on reargument, dated February 18, 1969. A single bill of costs is allowed to respondent to cover both appeals. Rabin, Acting P. J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated February 18, 1969, as, on reargument, (1) adhered to the original decision adjudging him in contempt of court and (2) provided for the making of a new order of commitment. Order dated [973]*973February 18, 1969, affirmed insofar as appealed from. No opinion. Appeal from order of the same court dated November 25, 1968 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order made on reargument, dated February 18, 1969. A single bill of costs is allowed to respondent to cover both appeals. Rabin, Acting P. J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.2d 972, 303 N.Y.S.2d 498, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/srebnick-v-srebnick-nyappdiv-1969.