Legal Opinion

Hammer v. Hammer

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 21, 1974PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs. This court accepts the fiudiug below,, that plaintiff husband, through long acquiescence, consented to a sex-limited relationship with his wife. It is notible that the husband neither demanded a renewal of sexual relations nor threatened to terminate the marital relationship because of the abstention. Indeed, although he alleged 10 years of abstentión, he conceded that he had no intention of ending the marriage until just prior, to quitting the marital abode in May, 1970.

In light of these facts of consent and…

2Cited by17 opinions

  1. Filippi v. FilippiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  2. Breckinridge v. BreckinridgeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  3. Nicholson v. NicholsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  4. Frances G. v. Vincent G.New York Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Lebensfeld v. LebensfeldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API