## Facts

- The case is identified by citations indicating a New York trial-court decision reported in table form: 29 Misc. 3d 1202(A), 958 N.Y.S.2d 311 (Table), and 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 51671(U), with parallel Westlaw citation 2010 WL 3781286.
- The “(U)” slip-opinion designation and “Table” reporting indicate the decision was not published in full in the official reporters and may be accessible primarily through subscription databases or court electronic systems.
- The available material does not include the opinion’s text, the underlying factual record, the parties’ first names, or the subject matter of the dispute (e.g., matrimonial, contract, tort, etc.).
- The available material does not include the county, judge, or specific trial court part, beyond the general indication that it is a trial-level New York decision commonly associated with the Supreme Court (the state trial court of general jurisdiction).
- The available material does not include the procedural posture (e.g., motion to dismiss, summary judgment, post-judgment enforcement, or other application), the relief requested, or any orders entered.
- Because the opinion text is absent, there is no reliable basis to state what evidence was considered, what legal standards were applied, or what findings (if any) were made.
- Any attempt to supply concrete facts, holdings, or reasoning beyond what the citation format implies would require guessing and would risk inaccuracy.

## Issues

1. What factual findings, procedural posture, and claims or defenses were addressed in Weiss v. Weiss as decided in 2010 under 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 51671(U)?
2. What legal standards did the trial court apply to resolve the parties’ dispute, and how were those standards applied to the record?
3. What was the disposition (grant/deny in whole or part; judgment/order entered), and what relief, if any, was awarded?

## Decision

- The decision’s outcome cannot be summarized from the available material because the opinion text and docket-level details are not provided.
- The only information that can be stated with confidence is bibliographic and contextual: the matter was resolved by a New York trial court in 2010 and was issued as an unpublished slip opinion with table reporting.
- Without the opinion, it cannot be determined whether the court granted or denied a motion, entered judgment, modified prior relief, or addressed substantive merits.

## Legal Principles

- In New York, “Misc. 3d” reporting and “N.Y. Slip Op.” designations are commonly used for trial-level decisions; table citations indicate the decision is referenced in reporter tables but not printed in full in the reporter.
- An unpublished or slip trial-court decision generally has limited precedential weight; its persuasive value and citation permissibility depend on the forum, context, and applicable court rules.
- Accurate case summarization requires the opinion’s text (or reliable docket/order content) to identify: (a) the claims and procedural posture, (b) the governing legal standards, (c) the court’s reasoning, and (d) the disposition.

## Conclusion

Only the citation-level metadata is available for Weiss v. Weiss (a New York trial-court slip opinion from 2010), so the facts, issues litigated, legal reasoning, and holding cannot be stated accurately without the opinion text or equivalent court record.


Weiss v. Weiss, 29 Misc. 3d 1202(A) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2010)