Vincent v. Vincent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vincent v. Vincent

162 A.D.2d 1050, 559 N.Y.S.2d 214, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9841

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

DecidedJune 22, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 162 A.D.2d 1050 (Vincent v. Vincent) 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

Vincent v. Vincent, 162 A.D.2d 1050, 559 N.Y.S.2d 214, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9841 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Oswego County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: Upon completion of cross-examination of plaintiff, who was the sole witness, the court recessed and conferred with counsel in Chambers. Following that conference, the court rendered a bench decision granting a divorce to plaintiff, distributing the property of the parties, and directing that findings and a proposed decree be submitted to the court. No written agreement was placed in evidence, no stipulation was made a part of the record, and the court failed to dispose of the counterclaim. Because defendant was not afforded the opportunity to testify or to present evidence in support of her counterclaim, she was denied a fair trial. Accordingly, we remit this matter for a new trial. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Oswego County, O’Donnell, J.—divorce.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Oswego County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: Upon completion of cross-examination of plaintiff, who was the sole witness, the court recessed and conferred with counsel in Chambers. Following that conference, the court rendered a bench decision granting a divorce to plaintiff, distributing the property of the parties, and directing that findings and a proposed decree be submitted to the court. No written agreement was placed in evidence, no stipulation was made a part of the record, and the court failed to dispose of the counterclaim. Because defendant was not afforded the opportunity to testify or to present evidence in support of her counterclaim, she was denied a fair trial. Accordingly, we remit this matter for a new trial. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Oswego County, O’Donnell, J.—divorce.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 A.D.2d 1050, 559 N.Y.S.2d 214, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vincent-v-vincent-nyappdiv-1990.