Cataudella v. Cataudella
| Decision Date | 24 March 1980 |
| Citation | 425 N.Y.S.2d 863,74 A.D.2d 893 |
| Parties | Josephine CATAUDELLA, Appellant, v. Vincent CATAUDELLA, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Strassberg & Strassberg, New York City (Milton Strassberg, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Anthony S. Caronna, Brooklyn, for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P. J., and LAZER, GIBBONS and MARGETT, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a matrimonial action, the plaintiff wife appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 4, 1979, which, inter alia, granted the defendant husband (1) a divorce on the grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment, and (2) related relief.
Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by increasing the amount of child support to $50 per week for each child and by adding thereto a provision that the plaintiff's cause of action for a divorce is amended to one for a separation and that her cause of action for that relief is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
At the outset of this action the wife's complaint demanded a divorce on the grounds of cruel and inhuman conduct and the husband counterclaimed for the same relief on the grounds of abandonment and cruelty. When the trial began, the wife amended her complaint to request a separation rather than a divorce, but when the trial concluded, Special Term granted the husband a divorce, denied alimony to the wife, awarded her custody of the two children plus child support of $40 weekly for each child, and made various other ancillary provisions. Although the wife's notice of appeal purports to place in issue each and every portion of the judgment appealed from, her brief raises only the issue of the divorce granted to the husband and, peripherally, the amount of support.
We are constrained to affirm the judgment granting a divorce to the husband, even though it is apparent from the record that the wife also would have been entitled to a divorce had she not withdrawn her request for that relief. Since the dissolution issue ultimately turned on credibility, we are not in a position to substitute our views for those of the Trial Justice who saw and heard the litigants. In this respect, the plaintiff's failure to call members of her family as witnesses to describe the December 24, 1978 occurrence involving disputed assault claims between the wife's family and the husband, militates against her version of the event (see Noce v. Kaufman, 2...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nehorayoff v. Nehorayoff
...to cohabit with him. (DRL § 170(1); Echevarria v. Echevarria, 40 N.Y.2d 262, 386 N.Y.S.2d 653, 353 N.E.2d 565; Cataudella v. Cataudella, 74 A.D.2d 893, 425 N.Y.S.2d 863). EQUITABLE The complaint is dated March 18, 1980, and the summons was obviously served considerably prior to July 19, 198......
-
D'Amato v. D'Amato
...to Special Term's determination on this issue of credibility (see Davis v. Davis, 83 A.D.2d 547, 441 N.Y.S.2d 26; Cataudella v. Cataudella, 74 A.D.2d 893, 425 N.Y.S.2d 863). However, with respect to the distribution of the marital property, it does not appear that Special Term complied with......
-
Griffin v. Griffin
...the trier of fact, and we discern no error in the court's crediting of plaintiff's testimony as to their value (cf. Cataudella v. Cataudella, 74 A.D.2d 893, 425 N.Y.S.2d 863). Further, the court's finding that the plaintiff, as custodial parent, should have exclusive title and possession of......
-
Rosenberg v. Rosenberg
...as his separate property obviously rested on an assessment of credibility which this court will not disturb (see, Cataudella v. Cataudella, 74 A.D.2d 893, 425 N.Y.S.2d 863). Given the plaintiff's numerous and substantial financial obligations and the need and desirability for him to retain ......