Opinion
Submitted September 16, 1999
October 25, 1999
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gartenstein, J.H.O.), dated July 21, 1998, as distributed the marital assets.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The trial court properly distributed the marital assets pursuant to a written agreement between the parties which was neither unconscionable nor overreaching (see generally, Levine v. Levine, 56 N.Y.2d 42 ; Christian v. Christian, 42 N.Y.2d 63, 71 ; Frank v. Frank, 260 A.D.2d 344 [2d Dept., Apr. 5, 1999]; Greenfield v. Greenfield, 147 A.D.2d 440, 442 ; Yuda v. Yuda, 143 A.D.2d 657 ). The court's determination rested largely on its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses presented during the trial, and the determination was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see,Matter of Liccione v. John H., 65 N.Y.2d 826 ; Petek v. Petek, 239 A.D.2d 327 ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., THOMPSON, SULLIVAN, and SMITH, JJ., concur.