From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glachman v. Perlen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 12, 1990
159 A.D.2d 553 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

March 12, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

When the plaintiff and the defendant became engaged, the plaintiff gave the defendant a diamond ring. Thereafter, he gave her a gold Rolex watch. After the engagement was called off, the plaintiff commenced this action to recover those items allegedly given to the defendant solely in contemplation of the parties' marriage.

Although the plaintiff may maintain a cause of action to recover gifts he gave to the defendant solely in contemplation of their marriage (see, Civil Rights Law § 80-b; see also, Gaden v Gaden, 29 N.Y.2d 80), the affidavits submitted by the parties regarding the circumstances under which the alleged gifts were given raise triable issues of fact precluding the awarding of summary judgment. Brown, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Glachman v. Perlen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 12, 1990
159 A.D.2d 553 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Glachman v. Perlen

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD GLACHMAN, Appellant, v. MELISSA PERLEN, Respondent

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

Date published: Mar 12, 1990

Citations

159 A.D.2d 553 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
552 N.Y.S.2d 418

Citing Cases

Torres v. Lopez

38 C.J.S Gifts § 61.In Glachman v. Perlen, 159 A.D.2d 553, 552 N.Y.S.2d 418 (2nd Dept 1990), the Second…

Maiorana v. Rojas

640, 633 N.E.2d 102 (2d Dist. 1994); Daigle v. Fourent, 141 So. 2d 406 (La.Ct.App. 4th Cir. 1962); Beberman…