Legal Opinion

Leeds v. Leeds

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

Decided October 5, 1954PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The agreement of March 13,1941, to the extent that it purports to relieve defendant of his obligation to provide continuing support to the plaintiff after the child of the marriage attains the age of twenty-one years, is void as against the public policy of the. State (Hyff v. Hyff, 286 N. Y. 71). “Section 51 [Domestic Relations Law], insofar as pertinent, provides that ‘a husband and wife cannot contract to alter or dissolve the marriage or to relieve the husband from his liability to support his wife.’ By such statutory prohibition, husband and wife are stripped of power to relieve the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Haas v. HaasNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
  2. Kyff v. KyffNew York Court of Appeals · 1941
  3. Rubinfeld v. RubinfeldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Estate of Fabrikant v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1963
  2. Hummel v. HummelNew York Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Bold v. BoldNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Colla-Negri v. Colla-NegriNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Estate of Fabrikant v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API