Legal Opinion

Fairchild Sons, Inc. v. Diskin

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided October 6, 1949PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Under the circumstances here disclosed, in the absence of an express contract to pay his father’s funeral expenses, defendant Diskin could not be, held liable therefor. There was no legal obligation upon him to pay such expenses by reason of the filial relationship. The provisions of statutes *496which impose liability on children for the support of indigent parents may be enforced only at the instance of the public authorities (Rutecki v. Lukaszewski, 273 App. Div. 638; Bellucci v. Dalessio, N. Y. L. J., Feb. 8, 1936, p. 727, col. 2). Additionally it appears that others pledged their credit for…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rutecki v. LukaszewskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Moloney Funeral Home, Inc. v. GurnellNew York Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Schoenfeld v. OchsenhautCivil Court of the City of New York · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API