TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Green v. Green

Maria L. Green v. Harry Green, Appellant-Respondent

Green v. Green, 127 A.D.2d 983 (1987)
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
February 27, 1987
Citations
127 A.D.2d 983513 N.Y.S.2d 491987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43478

Opinion of the Court

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

Judgment reversed on the law without costs, and complaint dismissed. All concur, Davis, J., not participating. Memorandum: The trial court erred in granting plaintiff a divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. In a marriage of long duration such as this one, a high degree of proof is required to establish cruel and inhuman treatment (see, Brady v Brady, 64 NY2d 339, 345 ; Hessen v Hessen, 33 NY2d 406, 411-412 ; Kleindinst v Kleindinst, 116 AD2d 988, 989 ; Passantino v Passantino, 87 AD2d 973, 974 ). At trial plaintiff testified that the marriage lacked communication and sexual intimacy, that defendant pushed her a few times causing minor bruises, and, as a result of such conduct, she gained excessive weight. Defendant denied the allegations of fault.

The record establishes, at best, only strained relations and incompatibility which are insufficient to sustain a divorce based on cruel and inhuman treatment (see, Kleindinst v Kleindinst, supra; Buckley v Buckley, 93 AD2d 973, 974 ; cf., Falcone v Falcone, 112 AD2d 796, 797 ). Plaintiff presented no medical proof to establish that her health was adversely affected by defendant’s alleged conduct (see, Warguleski v Warguleski, 79 AD2d 1107 ; Gemayel v Gemayel, 63 AD2d 831, 832 ). Since the divorce should not have been granted, we need not reach the other claims raised which relate to the trial court’s distribution of the marital property. (Appeals from judgment of Supreme Court, Ontario County, Cicoria, J.— divorce.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1987: 11988: 11989: 11990: 11992: 11994: 21995: 11996: 11997: 12007: 119872026peak 1994 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Urtis v. Urtis181 A.D.2d 1001 (1992)
  2. Marciano v. Marciano161 A.D.2d 1163 (1990)
  3. Gulisano v. Gulisano214 A.D.2d 999 (1995)
  4. Stagliano v. Stagliano132 A.D.2d 975 (1987)
  5. Walczak v. WalcZak206 A.D.2d 900 (1994)
  6. Reck v. Reck149 A.D.2d 934 (1989)

Most recent

  1. Gross v. Gross40 A.D.3d 448 (2007)
  2. Matthews v. Matthews238 A.D.2d 926 (1997)
  3. Van Vlack v. Van Vlack233 A.D.2d 895 (1996)
  4. Gulisano v. Gulisano214 A.D.2d 999 (1995)
  5. Walczak v. WalcZak206 A.D.2d 900 (1994)
  6. William MM. v. Kathleen MM.203 A.D.2d 883 (1994)

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 8

DepthCaseCited by
Kleindinst v. Kleindinst, 116 A.D.2d 988 (1986) 6
Hessen v. Hessen, 308 N.E.2d 891 (N.Y. 1974) 182
Brady v. Brady, 476 N.E.2d 290 (N.Y. 1985) 147
Warguleski v. Warguleski, 79 A.D.2d 1107 (1981) 16
Buckley v. Buckley, 93 A.D.2d 973 (1983) 11
Gemayel v. Gemayel, 63 A.D.2d 831 (1978) 8
Passantino v. Passantino, 87 A.D.2d 973 (1982) 8
Falcone v. Falcone, 112 A.D.2d 796 (1985) 8

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