Legal Opinion

Lustig v. Lustig

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

Decided June 27, 1945PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The orders denying the motion for physical examination should be affirmed, with leave to renew if the complaint be amended to show concealment of physical or mental ailments of such a vital nature as to support a claim that plaintiff’s consent was obtained by fraud. The allegation of the complaint to the effect that the defendant represented that he was in good health and that he had no mental or physical ailments, disabilities or disorders, and the further allegation as to the falsity thereof, are insufficient to show concealment of a disease or disorder so marked as to amount to a fraud.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lapides v. LapidesNew York Court of Appeals · 1930

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Frost v. FrostNew York Supreme Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API