Opinion
918 Index No. 3755/05 Case No.2023–03357
10-26-2023
Danielle WANSI, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Emmanuel WANSI, Defendant–Respondent.
Arnold S. Kronick, White Plains, for appellant. Emmanuel Wansi, respondent pro se.
Arnold S. Kronick, White Plains, for appellant.
Emmanuel Wansi, respondent pro se.
Webber, J.P., Moulton, Gonza´lez, Kennedy, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul L. Alpert, J.), entered on or about January 19, 2023, which denied plaintiff's motion to vacate a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) dated June 24, 2021, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Contrary to plaintiff's contention, applications and motions for the issuance of QDROs are not barred by the statute of limitations and the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts ( 22 NYCRR) § 202.48 is inapplicable because it was merely a mechanism to effectuate payment of defendant's share in plaintiff's retirement plan (see Kraus v. Kraus, 131 A.D.3d 94, 102–104, 14 N.Y.S.3d 55 [2d Dept. 2015] ; Denaro v. Denaro, 84 A.D.3d 1148, 1149, 924 N.Y.S.2d 453 [2d Dept. 2011], lv dismissed 17 N.Y.3d 921, 934 N.Y.S.2d 370, 958 N.E.2d 549 [2011] ). We further find that plaintiff was properly noticed by the proposed QDRO and note that plaintiff does not argue that the proposed document conflicted with the terms of the divorce judgment or that she was prejudiced by it.