Wohlfarth ex rel. Wohlfarth v. Wohlfarth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wohlfarth ex rel. Wohlfarth v. Wohlfarth

1 A.D.2d 658, 146 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3850

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1955

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 658 (Wohlfarth ex rel. Wohlfarth v. Wohlfarth) 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

Wohlfarth ex rel. Wohlfarth v. Wohlfarth, 1 A.D.2d 658, 146 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3850 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Petitioner in this proceeding brought pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Support of Dependents Law (L. 1949, eh. 807, as amd.) sought an order directing respondent to make payments for the support of the two children of the marriage. Such relief would be proper and the petition could be granted provided it were shown that the children were living with petitioner. There is nothing in the record to support a finding that the children are now with petitioner. Nor does it appear [659]*659with whom or where the children are residing at the present time. In the circumstances there should be a further hearing in Florida to develop these essential facts. Order unanimously reversed and the matter remitted to the Domestic Relations Court for further proceedings in accordance with the above memorandum. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Bastow, Botein, Rabin and Cox, JJ. [See post, p. 804.]

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

Petitioner in this proceeding brought pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Support of Dependents Law (L. 1949, eh. 807, as amd.) sought an order directing respondent to make payments for the support of the two children of the marriage. Such relief would be proper and the petition could be granted provided it were shown that the children were living with petitioner. There is nothing in the record to support a finding that the children are now with petitioner. Nor does it appear [659]*659with whom or where the children are residing at the present time. In the circumstances there should be a further hearing in Florida to develop these essential facts. Order unanimously reversed and the matter remitted to the Domestic Relations Court for further proceedings in accordance with the above memorandum. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Bastow, Botein, Rabin and Cox, JJ. [See post, p. 804.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 658, 146 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wohlfarth-ex-rel-wohlfarth-v-wohlfarth-nyappdiv-1955.