32 A.2d 362
Court of Errors and Appeals.Submitted October term, 1942.
Decided May 18th, 1943.
1. The assessment of accountants’ expenses against the defendant-husband for examination of the books of a corporation in which he is interested, approved only because he, by his conduct and failure to appeal from the order appointing the auditors, acquiesced in the procedure adopted and cannot now complain respecting it.
2. Counsel fee of $7,500 reduced to $5,000.
On appeal from an order of the Court of Chancery.
Mr. Nicholas Brescia and Mr. Meyer E. Ruback, for the petitioner-respondent.
Messrs. McCarter, English Egner, for the defendant-appellant.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order of the Court of Chancery in a matrimonial cause following the award of a decree of divorce from bed and board to the petitioner wife. The opinions of this court on previous appeals in the cause are reported at 127 N.J. Eq. 13
and 129 N.J. Eq. 101.
The present appeal challenges the amount of alimony awarded, the counsel fee allowed and the assessment of certain expenses against the husband. As to the item for accountants’ expenses for examination of the books of a corporation in which defendant is interested, it is approved only because we consider that the appellant by his conduct and
Page 348
by his failure to appeal from the order appointing the auditors acquiesced in the procedure adopted and cannot now complain respecting it. An examination of the record leads us to the conclusion that the counsel fee of $7,500 should be reduced to $5,000 and that the order appealed from should in all other respects be affirmed.
As to allowances of counsel fee —
For modification — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, PARKER, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, PORTER, WELLS, RAFFERTY, THOMPSON, JJ. 11.
As to allowances to accountants —
For affirmance — PARKER, DONGES, PERSKIE, PORTER, WELLS, RAFFERTY, THOMPSON, JJ. 7.
For reversal — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, JJ. 4.
As to allowance of alimony —
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, PARKER, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, PORTER, WELLS, RAFFERTY, THOMPSON, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None.
For modification — CASE, J. 1.
Page 349
64 N.J.L. 99 THE STATE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR v. ALBERT J. ACKERMAN, DEFENDANT BELOW, PLAINTIFF…
SYLLABUS (This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court.? It has been…
APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION (January 25, 2017) SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION, ESSEX COUNTY…
APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, ESSEX COUNTY STATE OF NEW JERSEY,…
811 A.2d 909 IN THE MATTER OF MARTIN C. LATINSKY, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.Supreme Court…
669 A.2d 1378 GLORIA YUN, ADMINISTRATOR AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE OF CHANG HAK YUN,…