From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pernetti v. Turci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 21, 1995
213 A.D.2d 277 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 21, 1995

Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (George Jurow, J.).


The Family Court, in dismissing petitioner's application for an upward modification of the maintenance payments set forth in the terms of the parties' Stipulation of Settlement, which was incorporated into and survived their Judgment of Divorce, properly determined that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances warranting such a modification pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (9) (b).

Petitioner is therefore not entitled to set aside the maintenance provisions, where, as here, the record supports the hearing court's finding that petitioner, while represented by competent counsel, voluntarily and knowingly entered into the Stipulation of Settlement and agreed to the maintenance provisions of the Stipulation which were fair and reasonable (Ruxton v. Ruxton, 181 A.D.2d 876). There is no proof that the petitioner's medical and financial circumstances significantly worsened or the respondent's income and assets significantly increased between the time of the underlying divorce judgment and the subsequent application for upward modification (Trainor v Trainor, 188 A.D.2d 461).

We have reviewed the petitioner's remaining pro se claims and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Asch and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Pernetti v. Turci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 21, 1995
213 A.D.2d 277 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Pernetti v. Turci

Case Details

Full title:ROSE M. PERNETTI, Appellant, v. GENNARO TURCI, Respondent

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

Date published: Mar 21, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 277 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
624 N.Y.S.2d 131

Citing Cases

Valvo v. Valvo

Accordingly, we agree with Family Court that the father's support for his alleged hardship is at least…

Luftig v. Luftig

That standard, however, applies only to modifications of prior orders or judgments of the court for…