From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schmalholz v. Schmalholz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 9, 1906
111 App. Div. 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)

Opinion

March 9, 1906.

Max Schleimer, for the appellant.

Benno Loewy, for the respondent.


Prior to the commencement of this action, in an action in which this defendant was plaintiff, a judgment of separation was obtained awarding her alimony of $120 per month. That judgment remains unreversed and unmodified. Subsequent to the entry of that judgment this action was commenced to obtain an absolute divorce from the defendant upon the ground of adultery. She denied the charge and interposed a counterclaim demanding an absolute divorce from the plaintiff, whereupon a motion was made at the Special Term asking that alimony be awarded her during the pendency of the action, and for counsel fee to enable her to defend this action and to prosecute her counterclaim. The court below granted alimony at the rate of $200 per month, inclusive of alimony awarded in the separation action, and counsel fee of $1,000.

I do not think the court had in this action the power to award the plaintiff alimony. By the judgment in the separation action the obligation of the defendant therein for the support of his wife was fixed at the sum of $120 per month. This was the limit of the liability of the husband for the support of his wife while that judgment remained in force, and the wife would have no claim upon the husband for support except as there provided.

While it may be true that the court had power to modify that judgment, an application for that purpose must be made in the action in which it was entered. The defendant here, having denied the allegations against her and set up a counterclaim charging the plaintiff with adultery, and asking a judgment of divorce, she should be awarded a reasonable sum to enable her to meet this charge. The counsel fee awarded her was, however, excessive.

The order appealed from should be modified by striking out the provision as to alimony, and by reducing the counsel fee to $500, and as thus modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal.

O'BRIEN, P.J., McLAUGHLIN, CLARKE and HOUGHTON, JJ., concurred.

Order modified as directed in opinion, and as modified affirmed, without costs. Order filed.


Summaries of

Schmalholz v. Schmalholz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 9, 1906
111 App. Div. 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
Case details for

Schmalholz v. Schmalholz

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD B. SCHMALHOLZ, Appellant, v . MARGARET SCHMALHOLZ, Respondent

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

Date published: Mar 9, 1906

Citations

111 App. Div. 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
98 N.Y.S. 510

Citing Cases

Zigman v. Zigman

( Beeber v. Beeber, 225 A.D. 757.) The conclusiveness of a decree such as is here being considered is well…

Smart v. Smart

Such an order is not a final decree or judgment, within the meaning of the Federal Constitution (Art. 4, §…