Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

CHARLES H. HOUCK v. HILDA M. HOUCK (11/27/68)

SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, SPECIAL TERM, CHENANGO COUNTY 1968.NY.43679 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 300 N.Y.S.2d 999; 59 Misc. 2d 1070 November 27, 1968 CHARLES H. HOUCK, PLAINTIFF,v.HILDA M. HOUCK, DEFENDANT Latham & Mogavero (Joseph A. Mogavero, Jr., of counsel), for defendant. Patrick J. Joyce for plaintiff. David F. Lee, Jr., J. Author: Lee, Jr.


David F. Lee, Jr., J.

Author: Lee, Jr.

 Defendant moves, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7), to dismiss the complaint, and for counsel fees in this action for divorce.

After commencement of the action in December, 1967 there was filed with the Conciliation Bureau a notice of commencement of the action which stated that the action was commenced on the grounds of "cruelty, abandonment, separation, adultery." The complaint alleges, inter alia :

"3. That defendant has committed acts of physical and mental cruelty to plaintiff for a period in excess of ten years. That some of the acts were, and conduct of defendant toward plaintiff are, as follows:

"That defendant has refused to cohabit with plaintiff as his wife for a period of ten years.

"That during the months of January, 1968 and April, 1968 defendant physically assaulted plaintiff by striking him across the face.

"That during the month of July, 1968, and on other occasions, defendant refused to permit Bunny Sue Houck to visit plaintiff in the residence owned jointly by the parties, and on such occasions called the local police department.

"That for a period of twelve years, defendant has continuously argued with plaintiff and accused plaintiff of crimes and obnoxious acts, all of which are untrue and without foundation.

"Defendant has telephoned customers of plaintiff jeopardizing his business and business relationship with said customers.

"That defendant has telephoned plaintiff's employer slanderizing plaintiff and jeopardizing his employment.

"That defendant has telephoned the local police slanderizing plaintiff and conveyed wild accusations and untruths.

"That defendant has received monies and payments from customers and has used the same for her own behalf without accounting to plaintiff for the same.

"That defendant has refused to discuss the problems between the parties herein.

"That as a result of the cruel and inhuman treatment of defendant to plaintiff, plaintiff was required to leave the residence owned jointly by the parties on April 10, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.