Case ID: ny_226/html/0575-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Josephine K. Clark, Respondent, v. George B. Lester, Appellant.
    
      Clark v. Lester, 185 App. Div. 944, affirmed.
    (Argued February 27, 1919;
    decided March 18, 1919.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered October 9, 1918, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion by defendants for judgment on the pleadings. The action was based on a contract between husband and wife. It is claimed that this contract was void and against public policy because made for the purpose of stimulating or procuring a divorce and contrary to the spirit of section 21 of the Domestic Relations Law which provides that a husband and wife cannot contract to alter or dissolve a marriage.
    The following questions were certified: “ 1. Is the agreement set forth in paragraph I of the amended complaint valid or enforcible? 2. Does the amended complaint herein state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action? ”
    
      Gustav Lange, Jr., for appellants.
    
      Arthur E. Sutherland and Frank S. Coburn for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; first question certified not answered; second question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ.