Zimmerman v. Zimmerman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zimmerman v. Zimmerman

254 A.D. 645, 3 N.Y.S.2d 251, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6862

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D. 645 (Zimmerman v. Zimmerman) 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

Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 254 A.D. 645, 3 N.Y.S.2d 251, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order reversed upon the facts, without costs, and motion denied, without costs, upon the ground that plaintiff’s affidavit, unsupported by other proofs, fails to show sufficient probability that plaintiff will succeed upon the trial in establishing that there was a common-law marriage between herself and defendant. Defendant’s affidavit, supported by many affidavits of apparently disinterested persons, refutes plaintiff’s claim in this respect. Under such circumstances, the award of counsel fees and temporary alimony should not have been granted. (Brush v. Brush, 240 App. Div. 866; DeVide v. DeVide, 186 id. 814; Bolnick v. Bolnick, 223 id. 772; Cassese v. Cassese, Id. 843; Werner v. Werner, 204 id. 791). All concur. (The order directs defendant to pay alimony and counsel fees.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

— Order reversed upon the facts, without costs, and motion denied, without costs, upon the ground that plaintiff’s affidavit, unsupported by other proofs, fails to show sufficient probability that plaintiff will succeed upon the trial in establishing that there was a common-law marriage between herself and defendant. Defendant’s affidavit, supported by many affidavits of apparently disinterested persons, refutes plaintiff’s claim in this respect. Under such circumstances, the award of counsel fees and temporary alimony should not have been granted. (Brush v. Brush, 240 App. Div. 866; DeVide v. DeVide, 186 id. 814; Bolnick v. Bolnick, 223 id. 772; Cassese v. Cassese, Id. 843; Werner v. Werner, 204 id. 791). All concur. (The order directs defendant to pay alimony and counsel fees.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D. 645, 3 N.Y.S.2d 251, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zimmerman-v-zimmerman-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack