Gelep v. Gelep

• Decision Date: 10 November 1966
• Citation: 52 Misc.2d 64,275 N.Y.S.2d 68
• Parties: Paul P. GELEP, Plaintiff, v. Patricia A. GELEP, Defendant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 68

275 N.Y.S.2d 68

52 Misc.2d 64

Paul P. GELEP, Plaintiff, v. Patricia A. GELEP, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County.

Nov. 10, 1966.

George W. Harder, Albany, for plaintiff, in support of application.

Alfred C. Purello, Albany, for defendant, in opposition.

LAWRENCE H. COOKE, Justice.

In this action for an annulment, plaintiff moves 'for an order striking out defendant's answer, and directing the entry of summary judgment for plaintiff upon the cause of action set forth in the complaint.'

In a matrimonial action, which includes one for annulment (CPLR 105(m)), a motion for summary judgment is available only to the defending party, based on documentary evidence or official records which establish the defense to the cause of action sufficiently to warrant the court as a matter of law in directing judgment, and the party seeking matrimonial relief cannot obtain it by summary judgment, even if he has documentary proof (CPLR 3212(d); Jones v. Jones, 25 A.D.2d 426, p. 427, 266 N.Y.S.2d 748; Denberg v. Frischman, 24 A.D.2d 100, 264 N.Y.S.2d 114; affd. 17 N.Y.2d 778, 270 N.Y.S.2d 627, 217 N.E.2d 675; Roberts v. Roberts, 47 Misc.2d 41, 42--43, 261 N.Y.S.2d 742, 743; Brandstadter v. Brandstadter, Sup., 193 N.Y.S.2d 687; Wachtell, New York Practice Under the CPLR, p. 175; 6 Carmody-Wait 2d § 39:6; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, New York Civil Practice, 3212.08; Boardman's New York Family Law, pp. 659--660).

Motion denied.