Wilk v. Wilk
225 A.D.2d 764, 639 N.Y.2d 946, 639 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3142
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 25, 1996
StatusPublished
This text of 225 A.D.2d 764 (Wilk v. Wilk) 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
Wilk v. Wilk, 225 A.D.2d 764, 639 N.Y.2d 946, 639 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3142 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).
Opinion
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s cross motion to vacate his default (cf., Otto v Otto, 150 AD2d 57, 58). Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Otto v. Otto
150 A.D.2d 57 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
225 A.D.2d 764, 639 N.Y.2d 946, 639 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilk-v-wilk-nyappdiv-1996.