Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel

Court of Appeals of New York
209 N.E.2d 709 (1965)


Facts

Lewis Rosenstiel (husband) (plaintiff) and Susan Rosenstiel (wife) (defendant) were married in New York in 1956. The wife had previously been married to Felix Ernest Kaufman. During that marriage, in 1954, Kaufman traveled across the U.S. border to Juarez, Mexico and signed that city’s Municipal Register, which established him as a resident there under Mexican law. Kaufman then went to a Mexican court where he filed a proof of registration and petition for divorce from the wife on the grounds of incompatibility and ill treatment between them. The entire process took approximately one hour after which Kaufman returned to the United States. The next day, the wife entered an appearance in the Mexican court through an attorney, submitted to the court’s jurisdiction, and admitted Kaufman’s allegations. The court issued a divorce decree that day. Under Mexican law, the court’s jurisdiction to grant a divorce was established by residence or submission to the court. Under New York law, consensual divorce was not permitted. At some point after the Rosenstiels were married in New York, the husband petitioned to annul the marriage on the grounds that the prior divorce decree was invalid, making the wife legally unable to have entered the new marriage. Despite the fact that lower courts in New York had recognized similar Mexican divorce decrees for approximately 25 years, the Special Term of the Supreme Court agreed with the husband and granted an annulment. The Appellate Division reversed. The husband appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Bergan, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Desmond, C.J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 203,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.