TAUSIK v. TAUSIK


21 Misc.2d 599 (1960)

Adolph Tausik, Respondent, v. Helen T. Tausik, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

April 14, 1960.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Bonom & Wolfson (Meyer Kraushaar and Philip Wolfson of counsel), for respondent.

Goldstone & Wolff (Sidney A. Wolff and Joseph F. Seminara of counsel), for appellant.

AURELIO and TILZER, JJ., concur; HOFSTADTER, J., dissents in opinion.


Per Curiam.

The refusal of our courts to entertain summary proceedings against a refractory spouse, trespasser though she may be (see cases cited in dissenting opinion; 1951 Report of N. Y. Law Rev. Comm., p. 65), was one of the reasons which led the Legislature to add subdivision 8 to section 1411 of the Civil Practice Act, affording to the "spouse with the legal right to possession" the simple and speedy relief of summary proceedings where "the husband and...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases