Legal Opinion

Anna Tappe, Inc. v. Battelle

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided April 30, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

It is well settled that alimony cannot be subjected to the claims of creditors when such claims antedate the allowance thereof. (Romaine v. Chauncey, 129 N. Y. 566.) As to *50judgment creditor’s claims arising after the allowance, particularly those for necessaries, the law appears to be that alimony is subject thereto. (Stevenson v. Stevenson, 34 Hun, 157; West v. Washburn, 153 App. Div. 460; Fickel v. Granger, 83 Ohio St. 101; Schouler Marr., Div., Sep. & Dom. Pel. [6th ed.] § 1754.) Therefore, assuming that the money due to the wife from the husband herein should be deemed to have the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Romaine v. . ChaunceyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. West v. WashburnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Keck v. KeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Balanoff v. NiosiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  3. Glasser v. RogersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1943
  4. Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank v. LehmanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1933
  5. Zander v. BrightSupreme Court of Kansas · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API