(Download) "Matter Estate Charles H. Lella" by Supreme Court of New York # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Matter Estate Charles H. Lella
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 23, 1970
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 59 KB
Description
[34 A.D.2d 703 Page 703] Charles Lella and appellant were married on February 5, 1960. He died in an airplane crash on July 4, 1969. During their
marriage they separated and reconciled five times. The last separation agreement was signed on November 20, 1968. At the same
time appellant, at decedent's insistence, signed a power of attorney for his use in obtaining a Mexican divorce immediately
thereafter. The sum of $1,000 was set aside by decedent in a bank account to defray the cost of procuring the divorce. The
parties, however, were together almost constantly following the signing of these documents. Subsequent to January 3, 1969
the decedent withdrew the "divorce money" and gave it to appellant for a Florida vacation, which she took, and where decedent
visited her several times. After the vacation they resumed normal marital relations until June 15, 1969 when they parted again.
Prior to that, however, and in April of 1969, decedent went on a five-day trip to Las Vegas, sponsored by his employer. While
there he went to Mexico and obtained a divorce. He returned home, appellant meeting him at the airport, and they once more
continued their married life. Appellant did not learn of the divorce until after her husband's death. These are the facts
as alleged in appellant's petition to vacate the decree. The appellant contends that the divorce is invalid because the power
of attorney was a nullity since it was signed in blank; but even if valid, it was annulled by the parties' subsequent reconciliation.
At the outset it should be pointed out that appellant is not asking this court to reverse and grant judgment in her favor,
but to reverse and remand for a trial on the issues raised and decided on affidavits by the Surrogate. Appellant in her affidavits
states that the name of the "attorney" was not contained in the power when she signed it. The inserting of the attorney's
name after the execution of the power could result in lack of jurisdiction in the Mexican court. (Kurman v. Kurman, 11 Misc.
2d 1035.) The attorney who prepared the power and [34 A.D.2d 703 Page 704]