Modell v. Modell, A--498
| Decision Date | 14 November 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. A--498,A--498 |
| Citation | 23 N.J.Super. 60,92 A.2d 505 |
| Parties | MODELL v. MODELL. |
| Court | New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division |
Joseph N. Braff, Newark, for plaintiff-respondent (Braff & Litvak, Newark, attorneys).
Stanley W. Greenfield, Elizabeth, for defendant-appellant.
Before Judges McGEEHAN, BIGELOW and SMALLEY.
The wife brought a suit for separate maintenance, in which she sought suitable support for herself and the two infant children of the marriage. The husband answered and counterclaimed for one-half the total moneys given by him to the wife to be saved for them jointly. A writ of Ne exeat issued and the husband was released thereon upon giving bond in the amount of $1,000. The husband appealed and the wife cross-appealed from the judgment which was entered.
No useful purpose would be served by dealing in detail with each ground of appeal and of cross-appeal. From our examination of the record we are satisfied that (1) the wife proved her cause of action for separate maintenance; (2) the wife did not become disentitled to relief because of any fraud, deceit or perjury; (3) the award of $70 per week for the support of the wife and two infant children is justified on the proofs; (4) the division made of the defense bonds and bank accounts, the exclusion of certain bonds from the division, and the charges made against the wife for three withdrawals from the bank accounts, are all sufficiently supported by the evidence; and (5) the discharge of the writ of Ne exeat was proper under the circumstances.
The husband attacks that part of the judgment which provides:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Black v. Walker
...at 361, 277 A.2d 535. Previously this court held that support and alimony obligations died with the obligor. Modell v. Modell, 23 N.J.Super. 60, 62, 92 A.2d 505 (App.Div.1952). "Modell, however, has been whittled away by subsequent case law." Jacobitti v. Jacobitti, 135 N.J. 571, 576, 641 A......
-
Chaney v. Chaney
...Simpson v. Simpson, 18 Md.App. 626, 308 A.2d 410 (1973); Flicker v. Chenitz, 55 N.J.Super. 273, 150 A.2d 688 (1959); Modell v. Modell, 23 N.J.Super. 60, 92 A.2d 505 (1952); Perry v. Perry, 84 App.Div.2d 612, 444 N.Y.S.2d 490 (1981); Ehrler v. Ehrler, 69 Misc.2d 234, 328 N.Y.S.2d 728 (Sup.Ct......
-
Flicker v. Chenitz, A--69
...Division the power to charge the husband's estate with the payment of alimony in an appropriate case. But cf. Modell v. Modell, 23 N.J.Super. 60, 92 A.2d 505 (App.Div.1952), where the trial court was denied the power to order the husband to create a fund, by way of insurance policies on his......
-
Grotsky v. Grotsky
...30 N.J 566, 154 A.2d 452 (1959); Raymond v. Raymond, 39 N.J.Super. 24, 30, 120 A.2d 270 (Ch.Div.1956); Modell v. Modell, 23 N.J.Super. 60, 62, 92 A.2d 505 (App.Div. 1952). The duty of parents to support their minor children was described by Blackstone as 'a principle of natural law.' 1 W. B......