Articles Posted in Divorce

It is not uncommon for New York couples to enter into prenuptial or post-nuptial agreements that define their rights and obligations with regard to property and assets in the event that they divorce. Marital agreements do not necessarily resolve all disputes over finances, though, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling in which the parties disagreed over what constituted appropriate child support and maintenance awards. If you want to end your marriage, it is essential to understand your rights, and you should confer with a New York divorce attorney as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the parties were married in March 2000 and have two children. In March 2012, they entered into a postnuptial agreement, which was later amended. In June 2012, the wife initiated a divorce action seeking ancillary relief. Following a nonjury trial, the trial court issued a ruling in October 2018, ruling on matters including maintenance, child support, equitable distribution, and attorneys’ fees. The judgment of divorce was finalized in December 2018. The wife then appealed specific portions of the divorce judgment. 

Generally, in civil litigation, parties are expected to pay for their own legal counsel. There are some exceptions to the general rule, however. For example, pursuant to New York law, the party with fewer assets in a divorce action may be able to recover counsel fees from their spouse. In a recent New York ruling, the court discussed the factors weighed in determining whether to grant counsel fees before deciding to grant them to the wife. If you are considering pursuing a divorce, it is in your best interest to confer with a New York divorce attorney to determine your options.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the husband and wife were married in 1995 and had two children, both of whom were adults by the time of this action. The wife filed for divorce on August 25, 2017. The case moved slowly, with multiple motions and hearings extending the litigation. One of the key early motions was filed by the wife in June 2020, seeking $25,000 in interim counsel fees, leading the court to order the husband, as the monied spouse, to pay her $20,000 for legal fees.

Reportedly, the case continued with further motions and cross-motions, including disputes over expert testimony and additional counsel fees. The court ultimately precluded the husband from using an expert report at trial due to late submission, a decision later reversed in 2023. Both parties filed numerous motions, including one from the wife seeking $65,000 in additional counsel fees in 2024. Although a settlement stipulation resolved many issues, the counsel fee issue remained for the court to decide. Continue reading

In many New York divorce actions, one party will seek child support and maintenance from the other while the dissolution is pending. The courts generally require both parties to submit documentation of their assets and liabilities prior to granting such requests. If a party fails to offer such proofs when making the requests but provides them at a later date, the courts can still consider them as long as the delayed presentation does not prejudice the opposing party, as discussed in a recent New York ruling. If you are contemplating ending your marriage, it is prudent to speak to a New York divorce lawyer about your options.

History of the Case

It is reported that the wife initiated a divorce action in June 2021, seeking both a dissolution of the marriage and ancillary relief. Several months later, in October 2021, the wife filed a motion requesting temporary spousal support, temporary child support, and interim counsel fees. The trial court issued an order granting the wife’s requests. The husband, disagreeing with this decision, appealed the order, specifically challenging the award of temporary spousal maintenance, temporary child support, and interim counsel fees.

Evidence Sufficient to Sustain a Request for Temporary Support in a Divorce Action

On appeal, the court reviewed the trial court’s decision, focusing on the procedural requirements for such motions in divorce actions. In doing so, the court noted that under the relevant New York court rules, a party seeking maintenance, child support, or counsel fees must submit a sworn statement of net worth along with a signed retainer agreement when making their motion. Continue reading

New Yorkers who decide to end their marriage will often attempt to expedite their divorce proceedings via stipulation of settlement agreements. While such agreements can allow for an efficient and amicable resolution, they must be crafted with due care, as any ambiguities could lead to disputes and litigation down the line, as demonstrated in a recent New York divorce action. If you have questions about your options with regard to divorce, it is smart to confer with a New York divorce lawyer as soon as possible.

Factual Setting

It is alleged that the husband and the wife were married in March 2000 and had one daughter, born in November 2003. The parties subsequently divorced in 2007. They resolved their financial and custody issues through a stipulation of settlement, which was incorporated but not merged into their final judgment of divorce in December 2007. Under this stipulation, the wife was granted exclusive occupancy of the marital residence until its sale, with the husband responsible for monthly mortgage payments, real estate taxes, and homeowner’s insurance. Additionally, the husband was required to cover 57% of their daughter’s college expenses, with no specific provision regarding who would pay the remaining 43%. The husband paid 100% of the tuition costs up to the date of the litigation.

It is reported that the husband sought enforcement of the stipulation regarding the marital residence and requested credits for payments made towards homeowner’s insurance, property taxes, and their daughter’s college tuition. The wife filed a cross-motion contesting these credits and seeking additional credits for mortgage principal reductions. The trial court granted the husband’s motion, awarding him credits for the insurance and tax payments and for the child’s tuition while denying the wife’s cross-motion entirely. The wife appealed. Continue reading

Generally, under New York law, any income or property a person acquires while they are married is deemed a marital asset. There are exceptions to the general rule, though, for things like property obtained via inheritance. While money from an inheritance can be converted to marital property, a person arguing it should be considered a joint asset must support their position via convincing evidence; otherwise, their argument will likely be rejected, as demonstrated in a recent New York case. If you or your spouse are weighing whether to end your marriage, it would benefit you to speak with a New York divorce lawyer about your options.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife married in 2013. During the marriage, the wife received a $125,000 inheritance from her grandfather, which she used towards the $160,000 purchase of their marital residence the following year. The remaining $35,000 was covered by a mortgage. Notably, the wife provided the husband a “gift letter” stating that the $125,000 was an outright gift to him so that he could demonstrate he had sufficient funds to purchase the home.

Allegedly, the husband commenced a divorce action in 2021. The trial court issued a judgment of divorce that included the distribution of marital property and awarded maintenance to the wife. The husband appealed the judgment, particularly challenging the trial court’s decisions on the classification of the $125,000 inheritance as separate property, imposing responsibility on him for the mortgage, and the awarding of maintenance to the wife. Continue reading

In New York divorce actions, it is not uncommon for one party to seek spousal maintenance from the other. The duration and amount of such maintenance are generally left up to the discretion of the trial court. If the trial court’s decision clearly constitutes an error, though, it may be modified on appeal, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion issued in a dissolution case. If you intend to end your marriage, it is smart to talk to a New York divorce lawyer as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the wife filed a divorce action. The trial court subsequently ended the husband and wife’s marriage via a judgment of divorce entered in September 2019. The judgment followed a nonjury trial and included several key decisions.

Allegedly, the court awarded the wife was awarded $1,500 per month in maintenance retroactively to the date the parties executed a stipulation dividing six parcels of real property. The court also granted the wife $25,000 in counsel fees. The court did not grant the husband credits for certain pendente lite payments. Both parties appealed. Continue reading

Generally, New York courts will resolve disputed issues in divorce actions in the judgment of divorce. If a court fails to adequately explain its ruling or reasoning, though, there may be grounds for appealing a judgment of divorce, as explained in a recent New York divorce action. If you have questions about how dissolving your marriage could impact your rights, it is smart to talk to a New York divorce lawyer as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the wife bought an action for divorce against the husband. The husband subsequently appealed the judgment of divorce that, among other things, distributed marital assets and awarded attorney’s fees, spousal maintenance, and child support to the wife. The husband argued several points of error, including the valuation of his medical practice, the classification of certain real property in Vermont as marital assets, and the treatment of his premarital contributions to his individual retirement account (IRA). Additionally, the husband challenged the imputation of income to him for spousal maintenance and child support and the failure to grant him an equalizing credit for a portion of the plaintiff’s IRA.

Grounds for Appealing a Judgment of Divorce

On appeal, the court found merit in several of the defendant’s arguments. First, it agreed that the trial court had erred in valuing the defendant’s medical practice without explaining its reasoning for doing so. Further, the court erred in considering certain real property in Vermont as a marital asset. The court explained that under New York law, property obtained in exchange for separate property remains separate, even if the exchange happens during marriage. Here, the defendant convincingly demonstrated that the Vermont property was bought using proceeds from the sale of his separate property, making it non-marital. Thus, the court modified the judgment by removing the portions related to the Vermont property. Continue reading

People who are married typically are not only connected emotionally and legally but financially as well. While divorce severs such ties, if they disagree over how their finances should be handled during the pendency of a dissolution proceeding, it can become complicated, and they may seek a resolution from the courts. For example, a New York court recently analyzed whether it could compel the sale of a marital home while a divorce is pending, ultimately finding that it could. If you intend to end your marriage, it is wise to confer with a New York divorce attorney regarding your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife were married and had two daughters, one of whom has special needs and requires ongoing care. Throughout their marriage, they enjoyed a lavish lifestyle, supported primarily by the husband’s income from a manufacturing enterprise and some financial assistance from the wife’s parents. The wife primarily served as a homemaker but later took a flexible sales position.

It is alleged that financially, the couple faced significant challenges. The marital home was at risk of foreclosure due to missed mortgage payments, despite a previous attempt to prevent foreclosure by the husband. The husband filed a motion to compel the wife to execute a mortgage on the marital residence, while the wife filed a motion to compel the sale of the marital residence. Continue reading

It is not uncommon for married couples to separate while contemplating whether they want to legally end their marriage. In such instances, they will often enter into a separation agreement indicating their rights and duties during their time apart. Such agreements are essentially contracts and are enforceable as such. There are exceptions, however, like agreements that are the result of overreaching or duress that will cause a court to deem them unenforceable, as demonstrated in a recent New York case. If you are determining whether you should end your marriage, it is smart to talk to a New York divorce lawyer to determine what steps you can take to protect your rights.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the husband initiated a divorce action asserting that the parties had been living separately under a property settlement and separation agreement filed nearly two years prior, as per Domestic Relations Law § 170 (6). The husband sought summary judgment to enforce the separation agreement, while the wife countered with a cross-motion, alleging that certain provisions of the separation agreement were unconscionable and the result of fraud, duress, coercion, and lack of financial disclosure by the husband.

In many divorce actions, the main point of contention is the division of assets. While parties may not want to divide marital property during a divorce, behavior designed to hide such property will likely be uncovered by the courts, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion issued in a divorce case. If you want to end your marriage and want to learn more about how it can impact you financially, it is in your best interest to speak with a New York divorce lawyer about what measures you can take to protect your interests.

Case Setting

It is reported that the wife instituted a divorce action. The court noted that the husband engaged in deliberate actions to obscure and hide marital assets. Specifically, the husband violated court orders restraining him from transferring assets or accessing safety deposit boxes. Moreover, the husband undertook transfers of ownership of his various businesses to his brother and a long-term employee, both before and after the wife initiated the divorce. He also engaged in transactions aimed at creating the appearance of having no assets, even going so far as to portray himself as earning a nominal income of only around $12,500 per year.

It is alleged that the trial court subsequently issued three judgments. The first one distributed marital property, including maintenance and child support, to the wife. The second judgment addressed attorneys’ fees, particularly for the wife’s attorneys, and the third judgment finalized the monetary aspects of the case. The husband appealed. Continue reading

Contact Information