From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tarshish v. Tarshish

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 6, 1967
27 A.D.2d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Opinion

April 6, 1967


Order, entered May 17, 1966, unanimously modified, on the law, without costs or disbursements to either party, to grant motion to the extent of striking from the complaint such part of the alleged cause of action and such part of the prayer for relief as seeks recovery of an in personam judgment against defendant for support and maintenance of the plaintiff and for counsel fees. In this action for a separation and for alimony and counsel fees, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant is a resident of Omaha in the State of Nebraska. Inasmuch as the service of the summons and complaint herein was made upon the defendant in the State of Nebraska, the court has not acquired in personam jurisdiction over the defendant. Although the matrimonial domicile of the parties was in this State and the plaintiff resides here, CPLR 302 is inapplicable to permit the court to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Of course, the court has in rem jurisdiction to grant a judgment of separation and may award alimony and counsel fees payable out of any property of defendant duly sequestered within the State.

Concur — Eager, J.P., Steuer, Capozzoli, Rabin and McNally, JJ.


Summaries of

Tarshish v. Tarshish

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 6, 1967
27 A.D.2d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)
Case details for

Tarshish v. Tarshish

Case Details

Full title:SHIRLEY TARSHISH, Respondent, v. ISAIAH TARSHISH, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 6, 1967

Citations

27 A.D.2d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Citing Cases

Whitaker v. Whitaker

It being conceded that the respondent has a bona fide domicile in the State of Florida, CPLR 302 is…

Renaudin v. Renaudin

Matrimonial actions are not among them, and the defendant having been served in Virginia, the court has not…