From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Franklin v. Franklin

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County
May 15, 1941
176 Misc. 612 (N.Y. Misc. 1941)

Opinion

May 15, 1941.

S. Earl Levene, for the judgment creditor.

Marx Kahn, for the judgment debtor.



Motion to vacate or modify third-party subpoenas is denied. The judgment creditor is the judgment debtor's former wife, whose claim is for alimony under a decree of divorce for a period subsequent to August, 1940. The judgment debtor became disabled in July, 1940, and the effort is to reach disability payments due him from an insurance company. The question is whether or not such payments can be reached in view of the exemption accorded to such payments under subdivision 2 of section 166 Ins. of the Insurance Law. For remedial purposes a wife having a decree for alimony is regarded as a creditor of the husband, but in essence an award of alimony is not an adjudication of a debt but a judicial determination of what portion of the husband's estate is to be applied to the performance of the husband's duty to support his wife. ( Romaine v. Chauncey, 129 N.Y. 566; Audubon v. Shufeldt, 181 U.S. 575, 577, 578, quoted in Gould v. Gould, 245 id. 151, affg. 168 A.D. 900.) I think, therefore, that an exemption of a disability payment from liability to debts generally is not an exemption thereof from the claims of a wife for alimony. I think, too, that liability to pay alimony is within a reasonable construction of the phrase "liabilities incurred for necessaries furnished the insured" and thus comes within one of the exceptions from exemption specified in subdivision 2 of section 166. Whether or not the husband is entitled to a modification of the decree for alimony cannot be considered on this motion. As long as it remains unmodified the wife is entitled to enforce it.


Summaries of

Franklin v. Franklin

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County
May 15, 1941
176 Misc. 612 (N.Y. Misc. 1941)
Case details for

Franklin v. Franklin

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Supplementary Proceedings: CAROLYN FRANKLIN, Judgment…

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County

Date published: May 15, 1941

Citations

176 Misc. 612 (N.Y. Misc. 1941)
28 N.Y.S.2d 195

Citing Cases

Schaffer v. Schaffer

In our search for authorities we have turned to decisions from other states which we think helpful. Hagedorn…

Matter of Wanamaker v. Wanamaker

The conclusions of this court are not in conflict with the Federal law or an infringement of Federal policies…