Weltman v. Weltman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weltman v. Weltman

30 A.D.2d 658, 291 N.Y.S.2d 376, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3560

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

DecidedJune 27, 1968

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 30 A.D.2d 658 (Weltman v. Weltman) 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

Weltman v. Weltman, 30 A.D.2d 658, 291 N.Y.S.2d 376, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3560 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment awarding plaintiff a separation, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of reducing alimony to $100 a week, effective January 9, 1968, the date of the judgment, reducing counsel fee to $1,000, and deleting the fourth decretal paragraph of the judgment, without prejudice, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the reduced alimony is consonant with the preseparation standard of living, and retroactivity should be limited to the date of the judgment since plaintiff was dilatory in applying for temporary alimony and in the prosecution of the action. The complaint and “amended supplemental complaint” served seven months later do not allege the claim of title adjudicated by the fourth decretal paragraph, and no proof was adduced with reference thereto. This claim can properly be disposed of in a plenary action. Concur—Eager, J. P., Capozzoli, McGivern, Rabin and McNally, JJ.

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

Judgment awarding plaintiff a separation, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of reducing alimony to $100 a week, effective January 9, 1968, the date of the judgment, reducing counsel fee to $1,000, and deleting the fourth decretal paragraph of the judgment, without prejudice, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the reduced alimony is consonant with the preseparation standard of living, and retroactivity should be limited to the date of the judgment since plaintiff was dilatory in applying for temporary alimony and in the prosecution of the action. The complaint and “amended supplemental complaint” served seven months later do not allege the claim of title adjudicated by the fourth decretal paragraph, and no proof was adduced with reference thereto. This claim can properly be disposed of in a plenary action. Concur—Eager, J. P., Capozzoli, McGivern, Rabin and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 658, 291 N.Y.S.2d 376, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weltman-v-weltman-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack