Demchuk v. Demchuk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Demchuk v. Demchuk

181 A.D.2d 756, 580 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3745

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 16, 1992·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

— In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated July 17, 1981, the defendant former husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered May 11, 1990, which granted the plaintiff former wife’s application to adjudge him in contempt for failure to comply with an amended judgment dated November 16, 1989, entered upon the parties’ oral stipulation, directing him to pay $34,800 for his children’s past college expenses.

[757]*757Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The direction to pay $34,800 for the past college expenses of the parties’ children was clear and unequivocal and was not conditioned, either in the amended judgment or in the parties’ oral stipulation, upon production of bills. The record supports the conclusion that the defendant’s refusal was willful and calculated to defeat the plaintiff’s rights, and that other means of enforcement would be ineffectual (see, Domestic Relations Law § 245). Thompson, J. P., Harwood, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated July 17, 1981, the defendant former husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered May 11, 1990, which granted the plaintiff former wife’s application to adjudge him in contempt for failure to comply with an amended judgment dated November 16, 1989, entered upon the parties’ oral stipulation, directing him to pay $34,800 for his children’s past college expenses.

[757]*757Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The direction to pay $34,800 for the past college expenses of the parties’ children was clear and unequivocal and was not conditioned, either in the amended judgment or in the parties’ oral stipulation, upon production of bills. The record supports the conclusion that the defendant’s refusal was willful and calculated to defeat the plaintiff’s rights, and that other means of enforcement would be ineffectual (see, Domestic Relations Law § 245). Thompson, J. P., Harwood, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Demchuk v. Demchuk, 181 A.D.2d 756, 580 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3745 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

181 A.D.2d 756 (Demchuk v. Demchuk) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related