Articles Posted in Spousal Maintenance

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. 

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

Many New Yorkers who are unsure about the status of their marriage separate before ultimately making the decision to divorce. In such instances, it is not uncommon for them to enter into a separation agreement that defines their rights and obligations. Many separation agreements are eventually incorporated into divorce decrees as well. As discussed in a recent New York ruling, it is important for anyone considering entering into a separation agreement to understand that it is a legally binding document that, in most instances, will be enforced by the courts. If you want to learn more about your options with regard to ending your marriage, you should speak to a New York divorce lawyer promptly.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the parties divorced; the trial court incorporated by reference the parties’ separation agreement into their final judgment of divorce.  The wife subsequently filed a motion seeking a money judgment for unpaid maintenance arrears totaling $70,857. The husband filed a cross-motion to reform or vacate certain provisions of the separation agreement. The court denied both motions but granted the wife’s request for counsel fees. Both parties appealed.

Enforceability of Separation Agreements

On appeal, the court affirmed the lower court’s decision regarding the enforceability of the maintenance provisions in the separation agreement. The court found that Domestic Relations Law § 236B(3) governed the case since the parties sought resolution through agreement rather than judicial intervention. The separation agreement, which was in writing, subscribed by the parties, and acknowledged appropriately, was deemed valid and enforceable. The court rejected the husband’s argument that a different section of the Domestic Relations Law applied due to his lack of legal representation during the proceedings, as the parties had a valid separation agreement. Continue reading

Most divorces in New York are resolved through a settlement agreement.  Written Settlement Agreements set forth the terms of the parties’ division of property and support obligations. Generally, the courts will incorporate such settlement agreements into the final divorce decree and enforce them as they would other contracts. This means, as discussed in a recent New York ruling, that any modifications of such agreements must be in writing. If you intend to seek a divorce, it is smart to meet with a New York divorce attorney to assess your options.

Case Background

It is reported that the parties were married in 1998 and divorced in 2013, with a judgment that incorporated a separation agreement. The judgment stipulated maintenance payments of $400 per month while the wife resided in the marital residence or until its sale, and $900 per month afterward. The separation agreement allowed both parties to continue living in the marital residence and listed it for sale in 2013. The agreement specified that it could only be modified in writing with formal signatures. The husband moved out in March 2013, no maintenance was paid, and the residence was not sold.

Allegedly, in 2019, the wife moved to hold the husband in contempt and sought maintenance arrears, sale of the residence, return of personal property, and counsel fees. The husband presented a written modification agreement dated February 2013 stating that maintenance would end when the wife resided with another person. The husband argued this agreement modified the maintenance terms to allow postponement until their child’s graduation. The trial found the modification valid and enforceable, awarding counsel fees to the husband, and denied the wife’s claims. The wife appealed. Continue reading

In New York divorce actions, the lesser-earning party will often seek spousal or child support from their spouse. The courts typically rely on income-based guidelines when evaluating such requests. In cases in which the higher-earning spouse’s income exceeds the income cap, the courts have the discretion to include income above the cap when making their decision. In doing so, however, they must consider certain factors, as discussed in a recent New York ruling. If you are interested in learning more about the economic consequences of ending your marriage, you should speak with a New York divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Procedural and Factual History

It is reported that in February 2018, the husband initiated an action for divorce. In August 2018, the court issued a temporary order that mandated the husband to cover all marriage-related expenses except for cell phone bills for the wife and their three children. The order also obliged him to pay $300 weekly as “unallocated support.” Subsequently, a parenting agreement was established in May 2019, leading to a financial hearing that month. Although the parties initially agreed on financial matters in July 2019, the wife never ratified this stipulation; as such, the financial hearing resumed in May 2021.

It is alleged that during this hearing, the parties settled on numerous issues, including maintenance and child support. The referee issued a memorandum decision post-hearing, which the court partially adopted and modified, culminating in the final judgment. The parties both appealed, asking the court to modify the awards for child support and maintenance. Continue reading

In many New York divorce actions, the courts will find it fitting to order one party to pay the other spousal or child support. Typically, support obligations are based, in part, on the income of both parties. In cases in which the courts believe a party is learning less than they are able to, however, the courts may impute income to them. In a recent New York divorce action, the court discussed when the imputation of income is appropriate. If you are considering ending your marriage, it is recommended that you meet with a New York divorce attorney to discuss how your decision may impact you financially.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the parties were married and subsequently divorced. The final judgment of dissolution addressed spousal maintenance, child support, custody arrangements, and property distribution. The husband appealed on several grounds, and the wife filed a cross appeal.

The cost of raising a child increases each year, and few people can afford it alone. As such, in cases in which parents split custody of a child, the courts will often order one parent to pay the other child support. If a parent refuses to pay child support, they can be held in contempt and may be incarcerated. As discussed in a recent New York ruling, however, the courts may be reluctant to both sentence a parent to serve time in prison and order them to pay child support arrears. If you have questions about your rights pertaining to child support, it is wise to confer with a New York child support attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the husband filed a motion requesting the court to find the wife in contempt of court for deliberately failing to comply with court orders to pay monthly child support and maintenance. The amount in arrears exceeded $48,000. The court ordered the wife to pay half of the arrears by a certain date in order to avoid further sanctions.

Allegedly, the wife failed to fully pay the purge amount. Consequently, the court issued an Order of Commitment, resulting in the wife’s imprisonment for a maximum term of three weeks. After the wife was released from custody, the court addressed the issue of whether the wife’s incarceration satisfied the purge amount. Continue reading

The following questions are examples of frequently asked questions during a consultation as it relates to contested divorces for parties with children. These are typically the topics that cover most contested divorce proceedings with children.

Divorces for people with children:

  1. How long do Contested Divorces usually take?

In many marriages, one spouse earns the majority of the couple’s income. As such, if a couple with dissimilar incomes decides to seek a divorce, the court may find it appropriate to grant the lesser-earning spouse maintenance. The courts do not merely rely on the parties’ assertions when considering whether to grant maintenance, and if so, in what amount, but will consider other factors as well. Recently, a New York court discussed maintenance awards in a matter in which the husband argued that the court abused its discretion in granting the wife nondurational maintenance. If you have questions regarding the financial impact of divorce, it is smart to speak to a New York divorce lawyer to address your concerns.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the husband and the wife married in 1985 and had four children. In November 2012, the wife instituted a divorce proceeding. When the trial was underway, the parties entered into a stipulation that resolved the issues of counsel and professional fees, separate property, and equitable distribution. The court subsequently issued a decision that imputed an annual income of $800,000 to the husband and approximately $62,000 to the wife.  It also entered a judgment of divorce that incorporated the stipulation of settlement agreed upon by the husband and the wife and granted the wife nondurational maintenance in the amount of $25,000 each month for five years, then $20,000 per month for an additional five years, and then $12,000 per month until either party died or the wife remarried. Both parties appealed.

Determination of Maintenance Awards

One of the issues on appeal was whether the trial court providently exercised its discretion in granting the wife nondurational maintenance. In assessing a party’s maintenance obligation, a court does not have to rely on the party’s own report of their finances but may impute income based on established future potential earnings or past income. It may also impute income to a person based on their future earning capacity, employment history, money received from friends and family, and educational background. Continue reading

Typically, people marry with the intent to stay together for the rest of their lives. Many marriages are short-lived, though, and last only a few months or years. Simply because a marriage does not endure for a long time does not mean that either spouse is immune from support obligations, however. This was demonstrated in a recent New York ruling in which the court rejected the assertion that a husband should no longer be required to pay pendente lite support for a marriage that lasted 16 months. If you wish to seek a divorce, it is smart to speak to a New York divorce lawyer to determine how your decision may impact you financially.

Procedural History of the Case

Allegedly, the husband and the wife married in February 2017. The couple had one child during their marriage, and the husband filed for divorce in August 2019. Resolution of the matter was delayed extensively, in part due to the husband’s failure to comply with court orders or engage in discovery and his failure to appear for hearings.

It is reported that in April 2021, the husband filed a motion asking the court to vacate a December 2020 order that required him to pay spousal maintenance, arguing that as the couple was only married for 16 months, he should not be compelled to pay pendente lite spousal maintenance 26 months after he filed for divorce. The court ultimately rejected the husband’s reasoning and denied his motion. Continue reading

Contact Information