Aron v. Aron
Cases that cite this one
18 later published cases cite this decision.
- Panagiotou v. Worlock Stone Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1942)
- Kalfus v. Kalfus (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Berkowitz v. Halberstam (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- Glenville & 110 Corp. v. Tortora (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Galiber v. Previte (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1976)
- Shulman v. Elco Construction Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1960)
- Waldman v. Waldman (New York Supreme Court 1958)
- Jones v. Jones (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1955)
- Zakkai v. David (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1955)
- Rosenfield v. Rosenfield (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1947)
- Goldberg v. Green (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1946)
- Times Square Liquidating Corp. v. Browner (City of New York Municipal Court 1945)
- Matter of Long (N.Y. 1942)
- Broderick v. Saretsky (City of New York Municipal Court 1942)
- Nash v. Nash (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1939)
- Kells v. Kells (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1939)
- Karp v. Karp (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1939)
- Karp v. Karp (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1939)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
It appears conclusively from the recitals of the resettled order that the testimony taken before the *330 referee was not before the justice at Special Term. Where confirmation is opposed of the report of a referee rendered in a proceeding to punish for contempt the court is not justified in confirming the report and making an order to punish for contempt without consideration of the testimony-in some form or agreement by the parties as to its substance sufficient to permit the court to pass upon a challenge made to the sufficiency of the evidence. (Cf. rule 170 of the Rules of Civil Practice.)
The orders should be reversed, without costs, and the matter remitted to the Special Term. The certified question is answered in the negative.
Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran. Finch and Rippey, JJ., concur.
Ordered accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.