From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 1997
235 A.D.2d 383 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

January 13, 1997.

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were previously divorced, the plaintiff former husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered January 19, 1996, which denied his motion to amend a Qualified Domestic Relations Order of the same court dated September 23, 1994.

Before: Goldstein, J. P., Florio, McGinity and Luciano, JJ.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the plaintiffs motion is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for entry of an amended Qualified Domestic Relations Order in accordance herewith.

As the Supreme Court indicated, the former wife was an equitable interest holder of the former husband's retirement fund. As an equitable interest holder of property held in a constructive trust ( see, Rosenberg v Rosenberg, 215 AD2d 365), the former wife must share in any losses or gains attributable to the fiduciary's investment of that property, unless the investment decisions are imprudent ( see, Matter of Lincoln Trust Bank, 223 AD2d 20; Matter of Wood, 111 AD2d 161). Since there is no claim that the former husband's investment decisions were imprudent, the Qualified Domestic Relations Order must be amended to allocate equally between the parties the losses and/or gains resulting from those investment decisions while he acted as a fiduciary for the constructive trust.


Summaries of

Brown v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 1997
235 A.D.2d 383 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Brown v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:GEORGEE. BROWN, Appellant, v. ROSE A. BROWN, Respondent

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

Date published: Jan 13, 1997

Citations

235 A.D.2d 383 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
652 N.Y.S.2d 75

Citing Cases

Rubin v. Rubin

Here, the parties agreed that the plaintiff was to transfer to the defendant “all of his right, title and…