Hall v. Hall
| Decision Date | 16 December 1976 |
| Citation | 55 A.D.2d 752,389 N.Y.S.2d 448 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Shirley E. HALL, Appellant, v. Russell F. HALL, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
K. Wade Eaton, Rochester, James S. Martin, Schenectady, for appellant.
O'Loughlin, Leonard, Lewis & Bendall, Schenectady (Richard M. Leonard, Schenectady, of counsel), for respondent.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. (Clifford A. Royael, Albany, of counsel), appeared pursuant to section 71, Executive Law, in support of section 248 of the Domestic Relations Law.
Before GREENBLOTT, J.P., and SWEENEY, MAIN, LARKIN and HERLIHY, JJ.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Schenectady County, entered August 20, 1975, which modified a previous order by reducing the appellant's alimony on the ground that she had been habitually living with another man not her husband and holding herself out as his wife.
Order affirmed, without costs, on the opinion of Levine, J. (Hall v. Hall, 82 Misc.2d 814, 372 N.Y.S.2d 344).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sanseri v. Sanseri
...Third Department, affirmed the court's findings of “holding out” and confirmed the modification of the award. Hall v. Hall, 55 A.D.2d 752, 389 N.Y.S.2d 448 (3rd Dept.1976) In a third case, just before the Court of Appeals decision in Northrup v. Northrup, a trial court judge refused to find......
-
Sanseri v. Sanseri
...Third Department, affirmed the court's findings of “holding out” and confirmed the modification of the award. Hall v. Hall, 55 A.D.2d 752, 389 N.Y.S.2d 448 (3rd Dept.1976)In a third case, just before the Court of Appeals decision in Northrup v. Northrup, a trial court judge refused to find ......
-
Pattberg v. Pattberg
...dismissed or not entertained (Hall v. Hall, 82 Misc.2d 814, 372 N.Y.S.2d 344 (Fam.Ct., Schenectady Co., 1975); aff'd 55 A.D.2d 752, 389 N.Y.S.2d 448 (3rd Dep't 1976) (constitutional challenge rejected because court can rationally distinguish between persons merely living together in tempora......
-
Sypek v. Sypek
...to prevent a paramour from living on support provided by the payor-spouse [Hall v. Hall, 82 Misc.2d 814, 372 N.Y.S.2d 344, aff'd 55 A.D.2d 752, 389 N.Y.S.2d 448, see, also, Anno. Divorced Woman's Subsequent Sexual Relations or Misconduct as Warranting, Alone or With Other Circumstances, Mod......