Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
YING JING YAN, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. KE–EN WANG, Defendant–Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saralee Evans, J.), entered November 18, 2010, which, after a nonjury trial, granted plaintiff's application for a divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's testimony that defendant directed her to have an abortion against her wishes and did not visit her during her two-week convalescence; that defendant often worked late into the evening and through the night and would not communicate his plans to plaintiff and ignored her telephone calls; that the parties fought often, both verbally and physically, especially after plaintiff refused to assist defendant in obtaining his green card; that defendant made false claims against plaintiff to the police; and that during an altercation, plaintiff suffered a serious laceration on her left forearm while attempting to block a knife yielded by defendant, amply established that defendant's conduct endangered plaintiff's physical and mental well-being and constituted cruel and inhuman treatment (see Campbell v. Campbell, 72 A.D.3d 556, 556, 899 N.Y.S.2d 48 [2010] ).
The court properly declined to grant defendant's counterclaim for divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. Even if defendant prosecuted his counterclaim, he did not establish that plaintiff engaged in a course of conduct that rendered it unsafe and improper for him to continue to cohabit with her (compare Israel v. Israel, 242 A.D.2d 891, 663 N.Y.S.2d 460 [1997] ). The court's credibility determinations are supported by the record (see Hass & Gottlieb v. Sook Hi Lee, 55 A.D.3d 433, 433, 866 N.Y.S.2d 72 [2008] ).
The record does not support defendant's contention that the court's conduct during trial deprived him of a fair trial or the right to present his case (see Messinger v. Mount Sinai Med. Ctr., 15 A.D.3d 189, 189, 789 N.Y.S.2d 132 [2005], lv. dismissed 5 N.Y.3d 820, 803 N.Y.S.2d 27, 836 N.E.2d 1150 [2005] ). Nor has defendant demonstrated that but for the alleged errors, he would have prevailed on the merits of his claim (see Messinger, 15 A.D.3d at 190, 789 N.Y.S.2d 132).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 07, 2011
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)