History
  • No items yet
midpage
Messlin v. Messlin
239 A.D. 916
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1933
|
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

The facts set forth in the moving papers filed on plaintiff's application for alimony and counsel fee do not warrant the granting of such application. We are of opinion, however, that the case should be tried during the June, 1933, term. If not disposed of during that term, the plaintiff should be allowed to renew her motion for alimony at Special Term on additional papers. The orders appealed from should be affirmed. Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, McAvoy, Martin and Townley, JJ. Orders affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Messlin v. Messlin
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jun 15, 1933
Citation: 239 A.D. 916
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.