From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MELE v. TINELLI

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 1, 1983
93 A.D.2d 979 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

April 1, 1983

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Oneida County, McKennan, J.

Present — Hancock, Jr., J.P., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and Moule, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and action restored to calendar for Supreme Court, Oneida County. Memorandum: Family Court has no jurisdiction to enforce a separation agreement as such (see Iseman v Iseman, 48 A.D.2d 809, app dsmd 37 N.Y.2d 918; "Manheim" v "Manheim", 200 Misc. 802, 806; Besharov, Practice Commentary, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, 1976-1982, Supp Pamph, Family Ct Act, § 411, p 71). Accordingly, Trial Term erred in transferring to Family Court plaintiff's plenary action on the contract for the recovery of arrears under a separation agreement.


Summaries of

MELE v. TINELLI

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 1, 1983
93 A.D.2d 979 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

MELE v. TINELLI

Case Details

Full title:SHARON B. MELE, Appellant, v. WILLIAM C. TINELLI, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 1, 1983

Citations

93 A.D.2d 979 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Citing Cases

Matter of Tighe-Duck v. Duck

And, of course, the Family Court has no jurisdiction to enforce a separation agreement as such. (Mele v…