Legal Opinion

Field v. Field

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

Decided December 9, 1952PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion denied. Examinations before trial in matrimonial actions which would allow inquiry into the marital relations of the parties, as a matter of policy are not usually permitted. No special circumstances are shown here to warrant an exception to this general rule (Tausik v. Tausik, 280 App. Div. 887 [1st Dept.]; Applebaum v. Applebaum, 273 App. Div. 966 [2d Dept.]; Shatz v. Shatz, 248 App. Div. 594 [2d Dept.]). Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tausik v. TausikAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
  2. Shatz v. ShatzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Hunter v. HunterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
  2. Buckley v. BuckleyNew York Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Kenyon v. Lord & Taylor, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Siciliano v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1953
  5. Pizzo v. PizzoNew York Supreme Court · 1962

6 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