Timmins v. Timmins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Timmins v. Timmins

50 A.D.2d 720, 375 N.Y.S.2d 71, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12599

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 720 (Timmins v. Timmins) 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

Timmins v. Timmins, 50 A.D.2d 720, 375 N.Y.S.2d 71, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12599 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In this appeal from a judgment granting plaintiff husband a divorce pursuant to subdivision (6) of section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law, the question presented is whether there was substantial compliance with the terms of the separation agreement between the parties. The fact that the husband, on occasion, fell in arrears on payments due under the separation agreement does not mean that he failed to substantially comply with its terms (Rubin v Rubin, 35 AD2d 460). Nor does the fact that he sought court approval of a reduction in payments required during periods of financial difficulty. It should be noted that the terms of the separation agreement required defendant wife to effect sale of certain jointly owned real property and to divide the proceeds but that she failed to do so. The record shows that his marriage is no longer viable. It is in the best interests of society that the parties to a dead marriage be able to extricate themselves from a perpetual state of marital limbo (Gleason v Gleason, 26 NY2d 28). (Appeal from part of judgment of Onondaga Supreme Court in divorce action.) Present — Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Mahoney and Witmer, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In this appeal from a judgment granting plaintiff husband a divorce pursuant to subdivision (6) of section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law, the question presented is whether there was substantial compliance with the terms of the separation agreement between the parties. The fact that the husband, on occasion, fell in arrears on payments due under the separation agreement does not mean that he failed to substantially comply with its terms (Rubin v Rubin, 35 AD2d 460). Nor does the fact that he sought court approval of a reduction in payments required during periods of financial difficulty. It should be noted that the terms of the separation agreement required defendant wife to effect sale of certain jointly owned real property and to divide the proceeds but that she failed to do so. The record shows that his marriage is no longer viable. It is in the best interests of society that the parties to a dead marriage be able to extricate themselves from a perpetual state of marital limbo (Gleason v Gleason, 26 NY2d 28). (Appeal from part of judgment of Onondaga Supreme Court in divorce action.) Present — Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Mahoney and Witmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 720, 375 N.Y.S.2d 71, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/timmins-v-timmins-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack