Legal Opinion

Severance v. Severance

New York Court of Appeals

Decided January 10, 1933PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

The provision of the final judgment of divorce “ directing payments of money for the support of the plaintiff ” (Civ. Pr. Act, § 1159) should be stricken out, the plaintiff having remarried, but without prejudice to the right of the plaintiff to seek relief under the provisions of the contract of December 12,1925. We express no opinion as to her right to support under such contract.

The order should be modified in accordance with this opinion and as so modified affirmed, without costs.

Pound, Ch. J., Crane, Lehman, Kellogg, O’Brien, ILubbs and Crouch, JJ., concur.

Ordered accordingly.

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. Goldman v. GoldmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
  2. Helvering v. LeonardSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  3. McMains v. McMainsNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
  4. Gush v. GushNew York Supreme Court · 1958
  5. In re the Accounting of Van ArsdaleNew York Surrogate's Court · 1947

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