Frank v. Frank
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
Plaintiff’s cause of action requires her to establish that an antenuptial agreement fixing her rights in the event of marital difficulties was procured by fraud and that the provisions made therein were inadequate considering the husband’s means. As a part of the relief demanded she asked that this agreement be set aside.
While it is unusual to grant examinations before trial as to the husband’s means in a separation action, this rule does not apply where it is necessary as here to show that a separation agreement has been procured by fraud and makes inadequate provision for the wife. As was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rosenthal v. RosenthalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jasne v. JasneNew York Supreme Court · 1952
- Andrews v. AndrewsNew York Supreme Court · 1955
- Berkey v. BerkeyNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Schreiber v. SchreiberAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1970
- Harris v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981