Case ID: ny-2d_60/html/0866-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tireth S. Sandhu, Respondent, v Manmohan Sandhu, Appellant.
    Decided November 22, 1983
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Dana Lee Van Buskirk for appellant.
    
      Louis S. Labert for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

There was no error of law in the conclusion reached by both courts below that cruel and inhuman treatment has been sufficiently demonstrated to satisfy the requirement of subdivision (1) of section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law (Hessen v Hessen, 33 NY2d 406, 411). In balancing the several factors to be considered on this record, the courts were not bound to deny relief to plaintiff husband because of the duration of the marriage and defendant wife’s lack of demonstrated ability to support herself.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [g]), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.