TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

McNulty v. McNulty

Mary E. McNulty v. Patrick J. McNulty

McNulty v. McNulty, 119 A.D. 150 (1907)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
May 10, 1907
Citations
119 A.D. 150104 N.Y.S. 2511907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3895
Headnotes
. Husband and wife —.separationA cruel and inhuman treatment. When in an action for separation upon the ground of cruelty, it is shown, that the plain tiff’s husband on several occasions beat and kicked her and falsely accused her of adultery and other misconduct; it is-error to dismiss the complaint..
Summary
■ Appeal by the plaintiff, Mary E. McHulty, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk -of the county of New York on the 9th day óf Hovembór, 1906, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial at the New York Special Term, dismissing the complaint upon the merits.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam :

Plaintiff is the wife of defendant and brings this action for a separation on the grounds of cruelty. Her testimony shows that on several occasions the defendant kicked and beat her and frequently falsely accused her of adultery and. other misconduct. While denying most of these accusations the defendant partially admits some of them.

We are of the opinion that the plaintiff established good ground for a decree of separation and that her complaint should not have been dismissed. From the evidence now before us it is manifest that the conduct and attitude of defendant toward the plaintiff is such that she ought not to be compelled to live with him.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present — Patterson, P. J., McLaughlin, Houghton, Scott and Lambert, JJ. ' '

. Jndgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide event.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1909: 11919: 11948: 119092026peak 1909 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Averett v. Averett189 A.D. 250 (1919)
  2. Knapp v. Knapp273 A.D. 993 (1948)
  3. McNulty v. McNulty118 N.Y.S. 1122 (1909)

Most recent

  1. Knapp v. Knapp273 A.D. 993 (1948)
  2. Averett v. Averett189 A.D. 250 (1919)
  3. McNulty v. McNulty118 N.Y.S. 1122 (1909)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list