Laff v. Laff
| Decision Date | 26 February 1957 |
| Parties | John Joseph LAFF v. Ellen LAFF (also known as Ellen Walters, Ellen Watkowitz and Ellen McDermott). |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
James S. Painton, Rockaway Beach, for plaintiff.
Peirez, Karmiol & Rosenthal, Woodside, Benjamin S. Rosenthal, Woodside, of counsel, for defendant.
Plaintiff sues to annul his marriage to the defendant who counterclaims for a separation.
The parties were married in Juarez, Mexico, on July 19, 1955. They lived together until December 6, 1955, when they separated. There has been no cohabitation between them since. There are no children of the marriage.
Prior to the plaintiff's marriage to the defendant she was married in June of 1947 to one John Walters, from whom she obtained a divorce in Juarez, Mexico, just prior to her marriage to the plaintiff. Plaintiff now questions the validity of that divorce, alleging that it was void and, therefore, when the defendant married him she was legally married to Walters.
The pertinent facts and circumstances which culminated in the divorce defendant obtained from her former husband are as follows: In February 1955 the defendant, in the presence of the plaintiff, asked her former husband if he were willing to cooperate with her with respect to obtaining a divorce against him. The parties had then been separated for several years and he acceded to her request, but refused to pay the expenses of obtaining the divorce. The plaintiff thereupon agreed to pay these expenses and eventually did. The defendant herein then consulted attorneys in New York, through whose efforts she instituted her action against her then husband in Juarez, Mexico, by an attorney with offices in that jurisdiction. In the meantime, defendant's former husband executed and delivered to her attorneys in New York a power of attorney authorizing a lawyer with offices in Juarez, Mexico, to appear for him in any divorce action commenced by his wife against him.
In July 1955 both the plaintiff and the defendant went to El Paso, Texas; they arrived on July 18th; crossed the Mexican border where the defendant signed certain 'divorce papers' and both then proceeded to the office of the Clerk of the court in Juarez. Walters' attorney filed a notice of appearance on his behalf, pursuant to the power of attorney he had received from him. This was done on the same day. After several hours, the parties returned to El Paso and on the next day the plaintiff and the defendant returned to the Clerk's Office in Mexico where the defendant received her decree of divorce. There, she married the plaintiff immediately thereafter. They returned to El Paso, remained for nine days, and then returned to New York.
While plaintiff's active participation in this matter and the conduct of the parties with respect to the defendant's Mexican divorce action does not commend itself to the court, the plaintiff's conduct would not estop him from obtaining the annulment he seeks if, in fact, the Mexican decree were invalid. Jackson v. Jackson, 274 App.Div. 43, 79 N.Y.S.2d 736; Honig v. Honig, 267 App.Div. 908, 47 N.Y.S.2d 623. However, in the action which resulted in the decree the plaintiff there, who is the defendant before this court, appeared personally within the Mexican jurisdiction and her then husband Walters, who does not attack the divorce decree, appeared in that action by his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wood v. Wood
...5 A.D.2d 770, 169 N.Y.S.2d 943, aff'd 7 N.Y.2d 949, 198 N.Y.S.2d 318, 165 N.E.2d 880)'. It regarded its decision in Laff v. Laff, 5 Misc.2d 554, 160 N.Y.S.2d 933, aff'd 4 A.D.2d 874, 166 N.Y.S.2d 678) as 'no longer controlling'. In the Laff case the usual pattern of personal appearance and ......
-
Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel
...Sup., 203 N.Y.S.2d 118, app. dsmd. 11 A.D.2d 1024, 214 N.Y.S.2d 287; Laff v. Laff, 4 A.D.2d 874, 166 N.Y.S.2d 678, affg. 5 Misc.2d 554, 160 N.Y.S.2d 933; Weibel v. Weibel, 37 Misc.2d 162, 234 N.Y.S.2d 298; Millman v. Millman, 27 Misc.2d 669, 207 N.Y.S.2d 159; Skolnick v. Skolnick, 24 Misc.2......
-
Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel
...spouse in person or by attorney (Leviton v. Leviton, Sup., 6 N.Y.S.2d 535, mod. 254 App.Div. 670, 4 N.Y.S.2d 992; Laff v. Laff, 5 Misc.2d 554, 160 N.Y.S.2d 933, Scileppi, J., affd. 4 A.D.2d 874, 166 N.Y.S.2d 678; Heine v. Heine, Sup., 231 N.Y.S.2d 239, affd. 19 A.D.2d 695, 242 N.Y.S.2d 705;......
-
Beneduce v. Beneduce
...318, 165 N.E.2d 880; Heine v. Heine, 10 A.D.2d 864, 199 N.Y.S.2d 788, as amended, 10 A.D.2d 967, 202 N.Y.S.2d 253; Laff v. Laff, 5 Misc.2d 554, 160 N.Y.S.2d 933, aff'd 4 A.D.2d 874, 166 N.Y.S.2d 678; Baylek v. Baylek, 25 Misc.2d 391, 206 N.Y.S.2d 359; Millman v. Millman, 27 Misc.2d 669, 207......