From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MacAllister v. MacAllister

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 2000
275 A.D.2d 1015 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

September 29, 2000

Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, McCarthy, J. — Matrimonial.

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P. J., WISNER, SCUDDER AND LAWTON, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:

Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff's motion to compel discovery in this action for divorce. Four days before her wedding, plaintiff signed a prenuptial agreement waiving her rights to the interest of defendant in his family's business. Plaintiff contends that she is entitled to financial information on the appreciated value of defendant's family business during the marriage. She further contends that the prenuptial agreement is ambiguous with respect to any appreciated interest in the business because the paragraph concerning future interests is "gibberish". While we agree that the paragraph in question is not artfully drawn, we conclude that the agreement, "read as a whole," resolves the ambiguity in that paragraph ( Hudson-Port Ewen Assocs. v. Chien Kuo, 78 N.Y.2d 944, 945; see, Kass v. Kass, 91 N.Y.2d 554, 566-567). Furthermore, plaintiff is chargeable with knowledge of the terms of the agreement, even if she claims not to have read it ( see, Da Silva v. Musso, 53 N.Y.2d 543, 550-551). Consequently, plaintiff waived all rights to equitable distribution of the interest of defendant in his family's business, including any rights to the appreciated value.


Summaries of

MacAllister v. MacAllister

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 2000
275 A.D.2d 1015 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

MacAllister v. MacAllister

Case Details

Full title:DEBORAH MacALLISTER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. JOHN H. MacALLISTER…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 2000

Citations

275 A.D.2d 1015 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
713 N.Y.S.2d 596

Citing Cases

Strong v. Dubin

Indeed, the only assets specifically designated to be "marital property" are the prospective joint banking,…

Montoya v. Montoya

As with any contract, the court looked to the Agreement as a whole to find meaning. MacAllister v.…