New York Divorce Lawyer Blog
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.
It is reported that the husband moved to dismiss the New York action on the grounds of forum non conveniens, arguing that the matter should be adjudicated in the Dominican Republic. The court denied the motion, citing procedural deficiencies including an unsigned attorney affirmation submitted through the electronic filing system. The husband then sought a reargument and renewal, asserting that the unsigned affirmation resulted from a technical error during filing..
What Constitutes an Appropriate Forum in Divorce Actions
The court began its analysis under CPLR 2221, which governs motions to reargue or renew. While the court declined to grant reargument, it accepted the husband’s explanation for the defective submission and allowed renewal. Nevertheless, upon reviewing the full record, the court adhered to its prior ruling and denied dismissal.
In considering the forum non conveniens claim, the court applied well-established factors including the parties’ residency, the hardship to witnesses, the location of evidence, and the availability of an alternative forum. The court emphasized that both spouses and the children reside in the United States, and that New York courts are competent to distribute the husband’s retirement assets through a qualified domestic relations order. The court concluded that the husband failed to demonstrate that the Dominican Republic was a more appropriate forum.
Regarding the wife’s misrepresentation, the court acknowledged its seriousness but declined to dismiss the action. It found the misstatement distinguishable from those in the cases cited by the husband. Unlike in those cases, the omission did not deprive the court of jurisdiction, nor did it fundamentally alter the posture of the case, particularly since the Dominican proceeding had been dismissed during the pendency of the New York action. The court reasoned that dismissal would be a disproportionate remedy that could potentially harm the children by disrupting the procedural timeline for calculating support arrears.
Instead, the court directed the wife to amend her complaint to reflect the accurate procedural history. It also allowed the husband to raise the misrepresentation at trial in connection with an application for counsel fees or by separate motion under 22 NYCRR § 130-1.1.
Meet with an Experienced New York Family Law Attorney Today
Jurisdictional issues and procedural missteps can significantly affect the trajectory of a divorce case, particularly where foreign proceedings are involved or one party fails to disclose material facts. If you are involved in a cross-jurisdictional divorce or need assistance responding to a motion to dismiss your case, it is critical to consult an attorney as soon as possible. Attorney Ksenia Rudyuk of Rudyuk Law Firm is a skilled New York divorce attorney with ample experience handling complex dissolution proceedings, and if you hire her, she can help you take the steps necessary to protect your interests. You can contact us at (212) 706-2001 or complete our online form to schedule a consultation.