Yates v. Yates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yates v. Yates

58 A.D.2d 579, 395 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12605

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

DecidedJune 6, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 58 A.D.2d 579 (Yates v. Yates) 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

Yates v. Yates, 58 A.D.2d 579, 395 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12605 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

. In amatrimonial action, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 28, 1975, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia, failed to grant him a divorce and made provisions for support of the defendant. Judgment affirmed, with costs. We agree with the trial court that the plaintiff-appellant failed to establish such cruel and inhuman conduct by the defendant-respondent in this marriage of more than 30 years’ duration as rendered "it unsafe or improper for the plaintiff to cohabit with the defendant” (see Domestic Relations Law, § 170, subd [1]; see, also, Hessen v Hessen, 33 NY2d 406; Lebovic v Lebovic, 52 AD2d 918).

Martuscello, J. P., Latham, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

. In amatrimonial action, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 28, 1975, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia, failed to grant him a divorce and made provisions for support of the defendant. Judgment affirmed, with costs. We agree with the trial court that the plaintiff-appellant failed to establish such cruel and inhuman conduct by the defendant-respondent in this marriage of more than 30 years’ duration as rendered "it unsafe or improper for the plaintiff to cohabit with the defendant” (see Domestic Relations Law, § 170, subd [1]; see, also, Hessen v Hessen, 33 NY2d 406; Lebovic v Lebovic, 52 AD2d 918).

Martuscello, J. P., Latham, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.2d 579, 395 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12605, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yates-v-yates-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack