Legal Opinion

Goldman v. Goldman

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

Decided February 8, 1996PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lo-bis, J.), entered on or about June 5, 1995, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3213 based on a judgment of Passaic County Superior Court, Probate Division, New Jersey, unanimously affirmed, with costs to be paid by defendant-appellant personally.

Contrary to defendant’s contention, Matter of Pearson v Pearson (69 NY2d 919) does not bar discretionary enforcement of nonfinal foreign decrees (see, Mittenthal v Mittenthal, 99 Misc 2d 778), but merely limits enforcemt of foreign…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pearson v. PearsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Mittenthal v. MittenthalNew York Supreme Court · 1979

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re GoldmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  2. Goldman v. Estate of GoldmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API