Opinion
03-15-2024
Charlotte MIHIGO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cyprien C. MIHIGO, Defendant-Appellant. (Appeal No. 1.)
ALDERMAN AND ALDERMAN, PLLC, SYRACUSE (RICHARD B. ALDERMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (JOHN A. CIRANDO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Martha E. Mulroy, A.J.), entered December 13, 2022, in a divorce action. The judgment, inter alia, granted plaintiff a divorce.
ALDERMAN AND ALDERMAN, PLLC, SYRACUSE (RICHARD B. ALDERMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (JOHN A. CIRANDO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., BANNISTER, GREENWOOD, AND KEANE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
[1–3] Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment of divorce, defendant contends that plaintiff failed to meet her burden of establishing that the parties were married in Africa in 1994. We reject that contention. "[T]he well-settled marriage recognition rule ‘recognizes as valid a marriage considered valid in the place where celebrated’ " (Lewis v. New York State Dept. of Civ. Serv., 60 A.D.3d 216, 219, 872 N.Y.S.2d 578 [3d Dept. 2009], affd 13 N.Y.3d 358, 892 N.Y.S.2d 272, 920 N.E.2d 328 [2009]; see Jayaram v. Jayaram, 205 A.D.3d 612, 612-613, 169 N.Y.S.3d 609 [1st Dept. 2022]; Martinez v. County of Monroe, 50 A.D.3d 189, 191, 850 N.Y.S.2d 740 [4th Dept. 2008], lv dismissed 10 N.Y.3d 856, 859 N.Y.S.2d 617, 889 N.E.2d 496 [2008]). Here, the parties testified that they met in 1987 or 1988 in what is now known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo and began living together as husband and wife and had children together shortly thereafter. In August 1994, in preparing to travel to a refugee camp to seek asylum, they obtained a document to show that they were married. Supreme Court found that the parties were married in 1994, and we afford that determination deference inasmuch as the court was " ‘in the best position to evaluate the character and credibility of the witnesses’" (Wideman v. Wideman, 38 A.D.3d 1318, 1319, 834 N.Y.S.2d 405 [4th Dept. 2007]; see Korpolinski v. Korpolinski, 195 A.D.3d 1427, 1427, 145 N.Y.S.3d 445 [4th Dept. 2021]). The parties’ testimony showed that they were considered married in their culture in Africa (see generally Matter of Mott v. Duncan Petroleum Trans., 51 N.Y.2d 289, 292-293, 434 N.Y.S.2d 155, 414 N.E.2d 657 [1980]; Matter of Mukuralinda v. Kingombe, 100 A.D.3d 1431, 1431-1432, 954 N.Y.S.2d 316 [4th Dept. 2012]).
In light of our determination, defendant’s remaining contentions are academic.