From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beckford v. Beckford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 29, 1976
54 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

November 29, 1976


In a matrimonial action, the defendant husband appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 10, 1975, which, inter alia, granted the plaintiff wife a divorce on the ground of his cruel and inhuman treatment of her and awarded her custody of the infant issue of the marriage. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The evidence was sufficient to support the granting of a divorce to plaintiff on the ground of defendant's cruel and inhuman treatment. In addition, the stipulation entered into at the trial, whereby defendant agreed, inter alia, to release to plaintiff the funds in the joint account at the Dry Dock Savings Bank, is binding and strictly enforceable (see, e.g., Yonkers Fur Dressing Co. v Royal Ins. Co., 247 N.Y. 435). Defendant has made no claim of fraud, duress, mistake or overreaching conduct on the part of plaintiff. Also, the award of a counsel fee to plaintiff was not an abuse of the court's discretion, in view of the financial condition of the parties. Hopkins, Acting P.J., Martuscello, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Beckford v. Beckford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 29, 1976
54 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

Beckford v. Beckford

Case Details

Full title:VIVIAN H. BECKFORD, Respondent, v. ASTON L. BECKFORD, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 29, 1976

Citations

54 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

Harrington v. Harrington

It was concluded in each case that, because the parties did not have an enforceable "opting out" agreement,…

Wagenmann v. Wagenmann

We find that the attorneys' fees fixed by Special Term are excessive to the extent indicated above, that Mrs.…