From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oreste v. Oreste

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 19, 1966
27 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Opinion

December 19, 1966


Order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 14, 1966, reversed insofar as appealed from, in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motion and cross motion are remitted to Special Term for (1) a plenary hearing as to the present financial resources and needs of the parties and all other facts relevant to whether any modifications of the alimony and support provisions of the judgment are warranted and (2) a determination de novo upon those issues. In our opinion, the conflicting affidavits submitted by the parties are insufficient to support a proper determination and a hearing must be held to develop all the relevant facts (cf. Alpert v. Alpert, 20 A.D.2d 560; Peters v. Peters, 14 A.D.2d 778; Sloan v. Sloan, 286 App. Div. 1102). Beldock, P.J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Benjamin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Oreste v. Oreste

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 19, 1966
27 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)
Case details for

Oreste v. Oreste

Case Details

Full title:CONCETTA V. ORESTE, Appellant, v. VINCENT C. ORESTE, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 19, 1966

Citations

27 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Citing Cases

Sloan v. Sloan

Therefore, a hearing must be held to develop all the facts relevant thereto (cf. Sloan v. Sloan, 286 A D…

Ruth v. Ruth

The record, however, is absent any evidence as to what the current needs of the children are, how much the…