From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Honig v. Honig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 13, 1944
267 App. Div. 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1944)

Opinion

March 13, 1944.


Action for a separation in which the defendant asserts that a decree of divorce obtained by the plaintiff in another State was ineffectual to dissolve her prior marriage, because of her failure to establish a bona fide domicile in that State. Judgment in favor of plaintiff reversed on the law, without costs, and judgment directed in favor of defendant, without costs. The findings of fact (Nos. 1 to 27 inclusive) are affirmed, except that in No. 12 "New York" is replaced by "Nevada". Conclusions of law Nos. 1, 4, and 5 are adopted. This determination is made on the authority of Lefferts v. Lefferts ( 263 N.Y. 131). See, also, Davis v. Davis ( 279 N.Y. 657). The quasi estoppel invoked in Krause v. Krause ( 282 N.Y. 355) does not seem to operate against a party who has not procured the foreign decree. Close, P.J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur. [ 181 Misc. 251.]


Summaries of

Honig v. Honig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 13, 1944
267 App. Div. 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1944)
Case details for

Honig v. Honig

Case Details

Full title:SHIRLEY HONIG, Respondent, v. WILLIAM HONIG, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 13, 1944

Citations

267 App. Div. 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1944)

Citing Cases

Pluchino v. Pluchino

There are no allegations that show such a relationship between the parties as to place respondent in a strict…

Jackson v. Jackson

In support of that proposition respondent cites Kaufman v. Kaufman ( 177 App. Div. 162 [1st Dept.]). That…