From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rudman v. Rudman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 13, 1951
278 App. Div. 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)

Opinion

February 13, 1951.

Present — Peck, P.J., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.; Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ., dissent and vote to modify in the following memorandum:

If this action for a separation had been commenced by the wife, it would seem to us that both counsel fee and alimony would have been denied on the ground of lack of sufficient probability of success. Inasmuch as it has been commenced by the husband against the wife, we vote to affirm with respect to the counsel fee award and to modify with respect to alimony pendente lite, by denying any alimony pendente lite for the support of the wife and to allow her $50 per week for the support of the child. [See post, p. 697.]


Order affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion.


Summaries of

Rudman v. Rudman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 13, 1951
278 App. Div. 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)
Case details for

Rudman v. Rudman

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES K. RUDMAN, Appellant, v. MARJORIE L. RUDMAN, Respondent

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

Date published: Feb 13, 1951

Citations

278 App. Div. 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)

Citing Cases

Hatala v. Hatala

On the return day of the motion she served her unverified answer which denied the allegation of adultery and…