From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Semon v. Saridis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 31, 1986
125 A.D.2d 882 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

December 31, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County (Bradley, J.).


In this matrimonial action, plaintiff initially commenced an action for annulment of the marriage, alleging fraud, and subsequently commenced a divorce proceeding on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. The parties have no children, plaintiff does not seek maintenance and there is no property subject to equitable distribution. The sole issue on this appeal is whether defendant is entitled to conduct an examination before trial of plaintiff with regard to plaintiff's grounds for annulment or divorce. Special Term found that he is not so entitled.

This court has recently determined that there is no general prohibition against disclosure concerning the merits of matrimonial actions and that restrictions on such disclosure are better left to individual determination (Nigro v. Nigro, 121 A.D.2d 833, 834). Accordingly, Special Term was not constrained to deny disclosure. Thus, we reverse and remit the matter to Supreme Court to exercise its discretion and decide the motion for a protective order based on the circumstances presented on such motion.

Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court for proceedings not inconsistent herewith. Mahoney, P.J., Main, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Levine, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Semon v. Saridis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 31, 1986
125 A.D.2d 882 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Semon v. Saridis

Case Details

Full title:KATHERINE SEMON, Respondent, v. KIRILOS SARIDIS, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 31, 1986

Citations

125 A.D.2d 882 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Schaefer v. Connors

As there is no basis in the record to find Supreme Court's order in error, it should be affirmed. We agree…

Howard S. v. Lillian S.

Berkman Bottger Rodd, LLP, New York City ( Walter F Bouger, Jacqueline Newman and Scott T. Horn of counsel),…