Legal Opinion

Chester v. Chester

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 1939PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.

The complaint to which the present motion for summary judgment is addressed is predicated upon provisions of a separation agreement which is no longer in existence, having been merged in the foreign decree in which the agreement has been incorporated. (Babcock v. Babcock, 147 Misc. 900; affd., 239 App. Div. 884; appeal dismissed, 263 N. Y. 665; Fales v. Fales, 160 Misc. 799; affd., 250 App. Div. 751.) The contract contained no reservation indicating an intent that it should survive the dissolution of the marriage by divorce. (Kunker v. Kunker, 230 App. Div. 641.) In that respect it differs…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kunker v. KunkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
  2. Miller v. MillerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
  3. Miller v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1927
  4. Babcock v. BabcockNew York Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Fales v. FalesNew York Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. " Johnston " v. " Johnston "New York Family Court · 1941
  2. Howland v. StitzerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. In re the Accounting of Van ArsdaleNew York Surrogate's Court · 1947
  4. Jaeckel v. JaeckelNew York Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Howland v. StitzerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

2 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