Zuckerberg v. Zuckerberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zuckerberg v. Zuckerberg

72 A.D.2d 733, 443 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13936

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

DecidedNovember 29, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.D.2d 733 (Zuckerberg v. Zuckerberg) 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

Zuckerberg v. Zuckerberg, 72 A.D.2d 733, 443 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13936 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered September 7, 1978, granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s action for conversion of a one-half interest in three joint bank accounts, reversed, on the law, and defendant’s motion for summary judgment denied, without costs. In an action for conversion of a one-half interest in three joint bank accounts brought by a wife against her husband some years after a divorce judgment, Special Term granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, on the view that a property settlement incorporated in the judgment of divorce disposed of all property disputes between the parties and precluded the action. We disagree. Although the property settlement was detailed in certain respects, aspects of it are at least open to the interpretation that future lawsuits were recognized as a possibility. Moreover the failure to allude to the joint accounts in the stipulation of settlement cannot be assumed to be without significance. Issues of fact as to the impact of the settlement on the rights of the parties with regard to the accounts are clearly raised, which preclude the granting of summary judgment and require a trial. Concur&emdash;Birns, J. P., Sandler, Bloom, Lane and Lupiano, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered September 7, 1978, granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s action for conversion of a one-half interest in three joint bank accounts, reversed, on the law, and defendant’s motion for summary judgment denied, without costs. In an action for conversion of a one-half interest in three joint bank accounts brought by a wife against her husband some years after a divorce judgment, Special Term granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, on the view that a property settlement incorporated in the judgment of divorce disposed of all property disputes between the parties and precluded the action. We disagree. Although the property settlement was detailed in certain respects, aspects of it are at least open to the interpretation that future lawsuits were recognized as a possibility. Moreover the failure to allude to the joint accounts in the stipulation of settlement cannot be assumed to be without significance. Issues of fact as to the impact of the settlement on the rights of the parties with regard to the accounts are clearly raised, which preclude the granting of summary judgment and require a trial. Concur&emdash;Birns, J. P., Sandler, Bloom, Lane and Lupiano, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.2d 733, 443 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zuckerberg-v-zuckerberg-nyappdiv-1979.