From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ariel v. Ariel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 1958
6 A.D.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)

Opinion

June 10, 1958


This action for divorce and separation was terminated by a stipulation of settlement and discontinuance dictated into the record on April 4, 1956. While it was not until after the stipulation was vacated and the case restored to the calendar that the motion was made to punish the husband for contempt, and the order adjudging him to be in contempt and fining him was entered, this court has held that the vacating of the stipulation and the restoration of the case to the calendar was erroneous ( Ariel v. Ariel, 5 A.D.2d 168). The action having effectively come to an end April 4, 1956, any subsequent steps taken to compel compliance with orders previously entered therein must fall ( Polizotti v. Polizotto, 305 N.Y. 176; Wheelock v. Wheelock, 3 A.D.2d 25, affd. 4 N.Y.2d 706). The order appealed from is therefore modified by striking therefrom the second, third and fourth decretal paragraphs and is otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal is dismissed. Settle order.

Concur — Botein, P.J., Breitel, Rabin, M.M. Frank and McNally, JJ.


Summaries of

Ariel v. Ariel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 1958
6 A.D.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)
Case details for

Ariel v. Ariel

Case Details

Full title:IRVING M. ARIEL, Appellant-Respondent, v. JOSEPHINE M. ARIEL…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 10, 1958

Citations

6 A.D.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)

Citing Cases

Tobin v. Tobin

Plaintiff, therefore, is relegated to pursue her rights either under the separation agreement or by a…

Fonfa v. Fonfa

Hence, at the time of the order appealed from — July 23, 1975 — the action in effect was dead. The inordinate…