Preston v. Preston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Preston v. Preston

107 A.D.2d 799, 484 N.Y.S.2d 633, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42720

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 28, 1985·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— In a matrimonial action, defendant husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Marbach, J.), entered July 15, 1983, which denied his motion for an order directing a hearing to determine the fair market value of the parties’ marital residence.

Order affirmed, with costs.

[800]*800The parties entered into a stipulation on the record, in open court by which it was agreed, inter alia, that the value of the parties’ marital residence for purposes of the plaintiff wife’s exercise of her first option to purchase was to be fixed by taking an average of the independent appraisals to be submitted by each party. The record fails to disclose any basis for setting aside the stipulation, which was binding upon the parties (Domestic Relations Law, § 236, part B, subd 3; Harrington v Harrington, 103 AD2d 356) and, accordingly, the value of the marital property was properly fixed pursuant to its terms. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

— In a matrimonial action, defendant husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Marbach, J.), entered July 15, 1983, which denied his motion for an order directing a hearing to determine the fair market value of the parties’ marital residence.

Order affirmed, with costs.

[800]*800The parties entered into a stipulation on the record, in open court by which it was agreed, inter alia, that the value of the parties’ marital residence for purposes of the plaintiff wife’s exercise of her first option to purchase was to be fixed by taking an average of the independent appraisals to be submitted by each party. The record fails to disclose any basis for setting aside the stipulation, which was binding upon the parties (Domestic Relations Law, § 236, part B, subd 3; Harrington v Harrington, 103 AD2d 356) and, accordingly, the value of the marital property was properly fixed pursuant to its terms. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Preston v. Preston, 107 A.D.2d 799, 484 N.Y.S.2d 633, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42720 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

107 A.D.2d 799 (Preston v. Preston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related