AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

MYRINE COLLINS HARTEN, Respondent, v. JAMES HARTEN, Appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The order denying the defendant's motion to strike out parts of the complaint should be reversed and the motion granted on the ground that paragraphs "Fourth," "Fifth," "Sixth," "Seventh" and "Ninth" fail to comply with rule 280 of the Rules of Civil Practice and that the allegations of fact contained in paragraph "Tenth" of the complaint fail to sustain a cause of action for abandonment.

The order, in so far as it denies the defendant's motion to strike out parts of the complaint, should be reversed and the motion granted, with leave to the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint. The order, to the extent that it grants the plaintiff's motion for temporary alimony and counsel fee, should be reversed and motion denied, with leave to the plaintiff to renew the motion upon service of a proper complaint.

PER CURIAM.

Order, in so far as it denies defendant's motion to strike out paragraphs Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth and Tenth of the complaint, reversed, without costs, and said motion granted, with leave to the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint within twenty days after service of order. Order, to the extent that it grants plaintiff's motion for temporary alimony and counsel fee, reversed and the said motion denied, with leave to the plaintiff to renew said motion upon service of a proper complaint.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HARTEN v. HARTEN
(May 17, 1940)