Opinion
October, 1927.
The parties having stipulated in writing that this case may be decided by a court of four justices, the decision is as follows: Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to the appellant to abide the event. We are of the opinion that under the terms of the agreement the defendant does not adequately provide for plaintiff. He has the benefit of the possession of a part and the rent from the other part of the wife's premises, with the result that the net provision that he makes for his wife is entirely inadequate for her support. On the state of the record before this court, the title to the property is in the wife and there are no facts shown which indicate that it is really the husband's property. This disposition of the cause makes it unnecessary to consider the appeals from the orders and they are accordingly dismissed, without costs. Manning, Young, Kapper and Lazansky, JJ., concur.