Articles Posted in Divorce

In New York divorce actions, disputes over asset classification can become even more complex when the marriage has foreign origins. When parties were married abroad, courts must determine whether that marriage is legally recognizable under New York law before proceeding to equitable distribution. A recent decision from a New York court illustrates how courts evaluate claims involving religious or informal foreign marriages, and how the concept of comity interacts with New York’s strong public policies regarding marriage equality. If you have questions about how a divorce may impact your financial well-being, it is smart to talk to an experienced New York divorce attorney.

History of the Case

It is reported that the parties were married in Egypt in August 2012 through an Urfi marriage ceremony and later participated in a civil marriage ceremony in December 2012. Allegedly, during the course of their marriage, the parties acquired ownership of two adjacent residential units in Egypt, referred to in the litigation as Apartments 4 and 5.

Allegations of fraud in post-divorce disputes can raise high-stakes questions about fairness, financial rights, and the enforceability of settlement agreements. However, while dissatisfaction with the terms of a divorce may lead one party to challenge a signed agreement, New York law sets a demanding legal standard for setting aside such contracts. A recent ruling from a New York court sheds light on how courts evaluate claims of fraudulent inducement, particularly when the stipulation language directly contradicts the allegations. If you are facing a legal battle over a marital settlement, it is in your best interest to contact a New York divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the parties married in 2004 and later divorced following the wife’s filing for divorce in January 2019. During the course of their marriage, they resided in a home in Westhampton Beach. The parties did not have children. The divorce action was resolved by a stipulation of settlement executed in August 2019. This original stipulation designated the husband as the monied spouse, required him to pay maintenance to the wife, and included provisions for the sale of the marital residence and the handling of liens tied to the husband’s debts. The stipulation was incorporated, but not merged, into the judgment of divorce entered in March 2021.

It is reported that the parties later executed a second agreement in May 2021, referred to as a post-judgment stipulation, which modified the original settlement. Under this agreement, the husband waived all rights to the marital residence and agreed to pay additional maintenance. The wife subsequently sold the marital home in February 2022. The husband filed a new action in March 2022 seeking to set aside the post-judgment stipulation, claiming he was fraudulently induced to sign it. He contended that the wife had misrepresented the status of their divorce and the value of the marital home, and that he relied on those alleged misstatements when waiving his rights to the property. Continue reading

In high-net-worth New York divorces, disputes over spousal maintenance, child support, and the division of valuable real estate often hinge on how courts weigh factors such as earning capacity, parenting roles, and lifestyle needs. Complications can arise, however, when one party challenges the fairness of a property award or seeks to impute income based on education and potential, even when the other parent has assumed the bulk of child-rearing responsibilities. A recent decision issued in a New York divorce action highlights how trial courts balance these factors to craft equitable outcomes. If you are involved in a divorce involving unequal incomes, substantial assets, or questions of income imputation, it is critical to speak with a knowledgeable New York divorce attorney about how the law may apply to your circumstances.

History of the Case

It is reported that the parties were married in 2010 and had three children over the course of the marriage. Allegedly, the wife filed for divorce in June 2021, seeking custody, spousal maintenance, child support, and other relief. The husband counterclaimed for divorce and requested similar remedies. The parties subsequently stipulated to joint legal and shared physical custody, agreed to valuations of their two real properties (a marital residence and a lake house), and stipulated to their 2021 incomes.

In New York’s family law courts, jurisdictional challenges in matrimonial actions often turn on where the parties and children reside, and whether any parallel litigation is pending in a foreign forum. But complications can arise when one spouse seeks dismissal of a New York divorce on the grounds that another proceeding is already underway abroad and the other spouse denies it in sworn filings, as demonstrated in a recent New York divorce action. If you are seeking or defending against dismissal in a New York matrimonial action, you should speak to an experienced New York attorney about your options.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the parties were married in the Dominican Republic in 2010 and have two minor children. Allegedly, both children currently reside with the wife, who was granted temporary custody and permission to relocate to Connecticut pursuant to orders issued in Bronx County Family Court. The husband, who resides in New York, has been awarded visitation rights under a separate order.

Allegedly, the wife commenced a divorce proceeding in the Dominican Republic in 2022, which was later dismissed in 2023. It is reported that in that same year, the husband initiated his own divorce action in the Dominican Republic. However, in April 2024, the wife commenced the present divorce action in Bronx Supreme Court and attested in her verified complaint that no other matrimonial action was pending. It is alleged that the wife later admitted this statement was false, as the husband’s Dominican proceeding had not yet been dismissed at the time her complaint was filed. Continue reading

In New York family law matters, stipulations of settlement incorporated into divorce judgments are treated with the same force and effect as contracts. The courts typically uphold these agreements unless a party can demonstrate ambiguity, fraud, or a substantial change in circumstances. A recent decision issued in a New York divorce case highlights the challenges of attempting to revise financial obligations absent clear legal justification, as the court ultimately found that the stipulation of settlement in question remained enforceable and that no grounds for modification existed. If you are involved in a dispute over the enforcement of a divorce agreement, you should talk to a New York family law attorney about your options.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the parties were married in 2005 and later entered into a stipulation of settlement in 2013. Pursuant to the stipulation, the mother was awarded sole legal and residential custody of their three children, and the father was obligated to pay monthly child support, along with the children’s private school tuition.

Allegedly, the father later filed a petition seeking a modification of his support obligations. He asserted that a change in the children’s living arrangements, specifically that the oldest child had come to reside with him, warranted an award of basic child support from the mother. He also reportedly requested that the mother be ordered to contribute to the private school tuition for the oldest child or, alternatively, that his monthly tuition obligation be reduced to reflect that he was only responsible for the younger two children’s tuition. Continue reading

In New York divorce proceedings, a properly executed stipulation of settlement can carry significant weight in determining the financial and custodial obligations of the parties. Specifically, once they are incorporated into a judgment of divorce, such agreements are treated as enforceable contracts, and courts will generally uphold them absent evidence of ambiguity, fraud, or unfairness. As such, it is important that such agreements are clear and entered into with thought and consideration, as they are difficult to challenge, as demonstrated in a recent New York divorce action. If you are considering ending your marriage, it is crucial to work with a skilled New York divorce attorney to protect your interests.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife were married in 2018 and had one child together. The wife commenced an action for divorce and ancillary relief in 2021. In February 2022, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement resolving issues, including legal custody and child support. This agreement was incorporated but not merged into the judgment of divorce entered in June 2023 by the Supreme Court, Queens County.

Allegedly, the stipulation provided for joint legal custody of the child and established a detailed parenting time schedule. The husband was granted overnight parenting time two nights per week and seven hours of access on Sundays. The stipulation further required the husband to pay child support in the amount of $1,560 per month directly to the wife. Continue reading

Divorce cases are often fraught with emotional and legal complexities, but some disputes extend beyond custody and asset division, raising ethical and professional concerns that can impact the very foundation of the legal process. When an attorney’s representation is called into question, courts must weigh a party’s right to legal counsel against the necessity of maintaining fair proceedings. In a recent New York decision issued in a divorce case, the court addressed the highly contentious issue of attorney disqualification, offering insight into the standards that govern conflicts of interest in legal representation. If you have questions about your rights with regard to divorce, it is smart to speak to a skilled New York divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Case Setting

It is reported that the wife filed for divorce in February 2023, marking the second such action between the parties. The first divorce, filed in 2015, was litigated extensively until 2018 when the parties reconciled and discontinued the proceedings.

It is alleged that the wife sought a protective order to prevent the husband from sharing litigation details with third parties and requested the disqualification of the husband’s attorney. The wife claimed that the husband’s attorney represented the husband’s brother in a malicious prosecution lawsuit against her, creating a conflict of interest. Allegedly, the wife argued that the husband and his brother had a history of coordinated harassment and that their attorney’s representation in both matters would disadvantage her in discovery. Continue reading