From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chandler v. Chandler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 21, 1985
108 A.D.2d 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Summary

In Chandler, the plaintiff had also commenced an action by service of a summons with notice, and no complaint or responsive pleading had yet been served.

Summary of this case from Giambrone v. Giambrone

Opinion

February 21, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Saratoga County (Dier, J.).


Plaintiff commenced the instant action by summons and notice (CPLR 305 [b]) on December 3, 1983 seeking a divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment (Domestic Relations Law § 170). Defendant appeared and demanded a complaint on December 15, 1983. Plaintiff's time to serve the complaint was extended by stipulation of the parties. In May 1984, when the complaint still had not been served, plaintiff served a notice of voluntary discontinuance pursuant to CPLR 3217 (a) (1). Defendant moved to vacate plaintiff's notice of discontinuance and the motion was granted. This appeal by plaintiff ensued.

Defendant's main contention is that after the commencement of the action and prior to the voluntary discontinuance of the action on the part of plaintiff, she was awarded temporary maintenance in the amount of $200 per week and sole occupancy of the marital residence. She claims that she would sustain a financial loss by the termination of the temporary order which would result from discontinuance of the action.

Plaintiff had the absolute and unconditional right to discontinue the action, without seeking judicial permission through a court order, merely through the service of the notice of voluntary discontinuance upon defendant. It is admitted that no pleadings were served, neither a complaint nor an answering pleading ( see, Battaglia v Battaglia, 59 N.Y.2d 778, revg on dissenting mem below 90 A.D.2d 930, 933-934). The affidavits on defendant's motion did not provide Special Term with any basis to exercise any type of equitable jurisdiction. Defendant has the same rights that she had before plaintiff's action was commenced, which includes, among others, the right to commence her own matrimonial action.

Order reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion denied. Mahoney, P.J., Main, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Chandler v. Chandler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 21, 1985
108 A.D.2d 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

In Chandler, the plaintiff had also commenced an action by service of a summons with notice, and no complaint or responsive pleading had yet been served.

Summary of this case from Giambrone v. Giambrone
Case details for

Chandler v. Chandler

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD E. CHANDLER, Appellant, v. FLORENCE R. CHANDLER, Respondent

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

Date published: Feb 21, 1985

Citations

108 A.D.2d 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People

Noel Harris first appeared on January 22. Thus, the application to withdraw, made on February 5, was within…

Newman v. Newman

Furthermore, since there is no provision in the CPLR for the service of a counterclaim where a summons is…