From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MATTER OF SACK v. ELMALEH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1959
9 A.D.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Opinion

November 9, 1959

Present — Wenzel, Acting P.J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.


Appeal (1) from so much of an order entered May 14, 1959, dismissing a writ of habeas corpus, as conditions appellant's visitation rights upon the payment of an amount of support for the two minor children of the parties over and above the amount fixed in a separation agreement, and (2) from an order entered June 3, 1959 denying appellant's motion to resettle the order entered May 14, 1959 so as to recite therein certain exhibits which were before the court, and for other relief. Order entered May 14, 1959 modified by striking therefrom the word and figure "Sixty ($60.00)" and by substituting therefor the word and figure "Forty ($40.00)". As so modified, order insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, there was no power in the court to increase the support payment for the minor children over and above the amount fixed in the separation agreement between the parties. ( People ex rel. Prior v. Prior, 112 Misc. 208; People ex rel. Klee v. Klee, 202 App. Div. 592; Matter of Derer, 262 App. Div. 969; Matter of Forbell v. Forbell, 274 App. Div. 853.) Sections 30 and 30-a of the Children's Court Act contain the only provisions for compeling future support of minor children where a nonmarital proceeding is brought for that purpose outside the City of New York. Appeal from order entered June 3, 1959 dismissed, without costs, as academic.


Summaries of

MATTER OF SACK v. ELMALEH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 9, 1959
9 A.D.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)
Case details for

MATTER OF SACK v. ELMALEH

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ARTHUR SACK, Appellant, against GLORIA ELMALEH, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 9, 1959

Citations

9 A.D.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Citing Cases

People ex Rel. Rugus v. Rugus

The record establishes her contention. It is equally clear, however, that the visitation permitted by the…

Matter of Paolella v. Phillips

The matter, having been adjourned because of respondent's confinement, has now been heard. The application…