From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pollack v. Pollack

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 17, 1982
439 N.E.2d 339 (N.Y. 1982)

Opinion

Decided June 17, 1982

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, THEODORE A. KELLY, J.

Norman M. Sheresky for appellant.

John A. Vassalo for respondent.


On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.2 [b]), order affirmed, with costs, and the question certified answered in the affirmative. The Legislature has determined that the controlling factor with respect to the applicability of the Equitable Distribution Law (Domestic Relations Law, § 236, part B) to pre-existing causes of action is not the date on which issue was joined, or the possibility that the party may be the type of person the law was generally intended to benefit, but the date on which the action was commenced ( Valladares v Valladares, 55 N.Y.2d 388; Tucker v Tucker, 55 N.Y.2d 378; Zuckerman v Zuckerman, 56 N.Y.2d 636). In this case the action was commenced before the new law became effective and therefore the application for a voluntary discontinuance in order to avoid the legislative mandate must be denied ( Tucker v Tucker, supra, pp 384-385).

Concur: Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER.


Summaries of

Pollack v. Pollack

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 17, 1982
439 N.E.2d 339 (N.Y. 1982)
Case details for

Pollack v. Pollack

Case Details

Full title:DIANE POLLACK, Appellant, v. EDWARD A. POLLACK, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 17, 1982

Citations

439 N.E.2d 339 (N.Y. 1982)
439 N.E.2d 339
453 N.Y.S.2d 623

Citing Cases

Felt v. Felt

Neither plaintiff nor defendant in this matter commenced any action or proceeding described in part A of…

Broder v. Broder

In Dunn v Dunn ( 86 A.D.2d 772, 774) the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, based upon the fact that…