Meisel v. Meisel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meisel v. Meisel

25 A.D.3d 518, 812 N.Y.S.2d 39

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 31, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.3d 518 (Meisel v. Meisel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Meisel v. Meisel, 25 A.D.3d 518, 812 N.Y.S.2d 39 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline W. Silbermann, J.), entered on or about August 3, 2004, which, in an action for divorce, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly found that the “Postnuptial Agreement,” which provided for the division of the parties’ assets in the event of separation and was negotiated with the assistance of separate and independent counsel, qualifies as a separation [519]*519agreement for purposes of a conversion divorce pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 170 (6). No issues of fact in that regard are raised by the circumstance that the parties did not separate until some seven months after the agreement was signed. Nor are any issues of fact raised as to the fairness of the agreement. We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Friedman, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline W. Silbermann, J.), entered on or about August 3, 2004, which, in an action for divorce, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly found that the “Postnuptial Agreement,” which provided for the division of the parties’ assets in the event of separation and was negotiated with the assistance of separate and independent counsel, qualifies as a separation [519]*519agreement for purposes of a conversion divorce pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 170 (6). No issues of fact in that regard are raised by the circumstance that the parties did not separate until some seven months after the agreement was signed. Nor are any issues of fact raised as to the fairness of the agreement. We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Friedman, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.3d 518, 812 N.Y.S.2d 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meisel-v-meisel-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack