From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hargett v. Hargett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 3, 1998
256 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 3, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin Diamond, J.).


The parties obtained a judgment of divorce in the State of Georgia in 1991. Thereafter, plaintiff, having reserved the right to do so, commenced the present action for equitable distribution of the marital property. Although the parties purported to settle the action by entering, in open court, into an oral stipulation of settlement, which stipulation was then so-ordered, defendant has moved to set aside the stipulation on the ground that it was not "in writing, subscribed by the parties, and acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded" in accordance with Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (3). However, the cited statute, by its terms, applies only to agreements "made before or during the marriage" and, accordingly, does not apply to agreements such as the subject stipulation made under judicial supervision (see, CPLR 2104) in the context of post-marital litigation over financial issues surviving the parties' judgment of divorce (see, Sanders v. Copley, 151 A.D.2d 350, 351-352; cf., Matisoff v. Dobi, 90 N.Y.2d 127). We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be unavailing.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Hargett v. Hargett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 3, 1998
256 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Hargett v. Hargett

Case Details

Full title:LILLIAN HARGETT, Respondent, v. JAMES HARGETT, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 3, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
680 N.Y.S.2d 526

Citing Cases

Rubenfeld v. Rubenfeld

We found that to hold otherwise would ignore substantial precedent and violate the oft-stated preference of…

Penrose v. Penrose

Even if these particular challenges were not time-barred, her attempt to enforce the provisions of the 1985…