Schulman v. Schulman
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtF. E. Johnson, J.
The plaintiff’s version of the facts seems more probable and he is entitled to a finding in his favor on the material allegations of the complaint. Counsel disagree on the legal effect of finding those facts-. If there was a discussion before marriage, such as the husband claims, he is entitled to judgment under the principles applied in Coppo v. Coppo (163 Misc. 249) and Mirizio v. Mirizio (242 N. Y. 74). If nothing was said on the subject in question before marriage, silence on the wife’s part warrants inferences along normal and legal lines and her subsequent conduct might well be said to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mirizio v. MirizioNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Sleicher v. SleicherNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Coppo v. CoppoNew York Supreme Court · 1937
- Sobol v. SobolNew York Supreme Court · 1914
- Miller v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1928
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bohok v. BohokNew York Supreme Court · 1946
- Thurber v. ThurberNew York Supreme Court · 1946
- Bruno v. BrunoNew York Supreme Court · 1972
- Schumer v. SchumerNew York Supreme Court · 1954
- Sefranka v. SefrankaNew York Supreme Court · 1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.