Beaverson v. Beaverson
| Decision Date | 16 November 1979 |
| Citation | 422 N.Y.S.2d 259,72 A.D.2d 963 |
| Parties | Margaret B. BEAVERSON, Respondent, v. James H. BEAVERSON, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Conboy, McKay, Bachman & Kendall, Watertown, for appellant, by Stephen W. Gebo, New York City.
John D. Stenard, Watertown, for respondent.
Before HANCOCK, J. P., and SCHNEPP, CALLAHAN, DOERR and WITMER, JJ.
The question presented upon this appeal is whether the court may modify a foreign divorce decree with regard to alimony when the original decree made no provision for alimony. Defendant-husband, while residing in Greece, commenced an action for divorce by service of process upon respondent in Watertown, New York on August 10, 1972. Plaintiff-wife did not appear before the Greek court and the decree became final on September 5, 1973, according to Greek law. The divorce decree made no provision for alimony. Plaintiff did not challenge the validity of the Greek decree. In May, 1978 she commenced a proceeding in Supreme Court, Jefferson County, seeking modification of the Greek decree to the extent of awarding alimony to her. The court entered an order modifying the Greek decree and ordering that plaintiff may apply to the Supreme Court or to Family Court for an allowance of alimony pursuant to such modification. It is from this order that the appeal is taken.
The order was in error. Family Court Act, § 466, subd. (c) provides: "(c) If the supreme court enters an order or decree granting alimony or support in an action for divorce, separation or annulment and if the supreme court does not exercise the authority given under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section; or if a court of competent jurisdiction not of the state of New York shall enter an order or decree granting alimony or support in any such action, the family court may
(i) entertain an application to enforce the order or decree granting alimony, or
(ii) entertain an application to modify the order or Decree granting alimony on the ground that there has been a subsequent change of circumstances and that modification is required. " (Emphasis added.)
This statute provides the authority for Supreme and Family Courts to modify a divorce decree of a foreign jurisdiction such as is involved in this case. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pearson v. Pearson
...upon which the decrees were granted (Matter of Silver v. Silver, 36 N.Y.2d 324, 367 N.Y.S.2d 777, 327 N.E.2d 816; Beaverson v. Beaverson, 72 A.D.2d 963, 422 N.Y.S.2d 259; Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 50 A.D.2d 879, 376 N.Y.S.2d 638). Since the Family Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, i......
-
Gonos v. Hadzipetros, 2014-04409, Index No. 202484/13.
...affd. 64 N.Y.2d 819, 486 N.Y.S.2d 938, 476 N.E.2d 337 ; Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 50 A.D.2d 879, 376 N.Y.S.2d 638 ; Beaverson v. Beaverson, 72 A.D.2d 963, 422 N.Y.S.2d 259 ).Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the former husband's motion to dismiss the ...
-
Langdon v. Mohr
...v. Silver, 36 N.Y.2d 324, 367 N.Y.S.2d 777, 327 N.E.2d 816; Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 50 A.D.2d 879, 376 N.Y.S.2d 638)" Beaverson v. Beaverson, 72 A.D.2d 963, 964). Special Term erred in concluding that respondent-appellant was estopped to raise the lack of subject matter jurisdiction defen......
- People v. Carter