Robert G. Smith, PLLC
212-499-0940

February 2020 Archives

Know what you can reasonably afford during property division

People who amassed a lot of assets during the course of their marriage will often have a complex time trying to divide everything if their union ends. These divorces require that you split everything up, but this often takes a lot of thought. Anyone who's in this position should take the time to think about what they can reasonably support when the marriage is over.

Court battles occur in the absence of prenuptial agreements

A high-asset divorce is sometimes challenging to work through because you have to think about how each division option is going to impact your future. One of the first things that we do when we work on a divorce that includes considerable property is find out if there is a valid prenuptial agreement in place. If there is, the terms of the agreement are what we will follow.

Children can learn life skills during divorce

Children who have parents going through divorce will face a rough time, but this doesn't necessarily mean they will walk away from the situation in a poor position. Instead, children can learn a lot when they see their parents going through this situation.

Divorce can negatively impact your credit so be careful

Many factors go into determining who is going to walk away with what assets in a divorce. It is imperative that anyone who is ending a marriage understands what is going to impact the settlement they receive. This is especially important in high-asset divorces because the stakes are serious.

3 reasons to avoid badmouthing your ex in front of your child

If you are going through divorce, it is natural to have some negative feelings toward your soon-to-be ex-spouse. Talking about these feelings can be a healthy way to help you manage them. It may be beneficial to lean on a trusted person, such as a therapist, parent, sibling or friend. However, there are several reasons why it is not a good idea to vent your feelings to your child.

16 Years of "Mere Silence" Eradicates A $ 53,312 Spousal Maintenance Obligation

In an interesting  case titled Makris v. Makris, decided on January 8, 2020, a New York appellate Court has employed the waiver doctrine to retroactively vacate a former husband's  $ 53,312 spousal maintenance obligation. The litigants were married with two children, and divorced in 1998.  The New York divorce judgment obligated the husband to pay both child support and spousal maintenance.   Alleging the existence of an oral agreement dating back to June 2001, the husband had stopped paying spousal maintenance in June 2001.  In August 2017, presumably when the child support obligation terminated, the wife hauled the husband into Family Court to collect 16 years' of allegedly unpaid spousal maintenance, which had by then grown to $ 53,312.   The husband thereafter filed a court petition to retroactively terminate the spousal maintenance obligation.  No doubt faced with a classic "he said - she said" conflict, not supported or refuted by any documentary evidence, the Support Magistrate found the husband's testimony to be credible and prospectively vacated the spousal maintenance obligation.  But the Support Magistrate did not retroactively vacate the  $ 53,312 spousal maintenance arrears. As all first year law students learn, a waiver is the voluntary relinquishment of a known legal right.  New York law also holds that a waiver cannot be inferred from "mere silence".  In the Makris case, the New York appellate court has held that 16 years of silence is not  "mere silence". There is nothing in the appellate court's published decision to suggest that Mr. Makris had suffered any adverse change in his financial circumstances.  The court used "mere silence" to retroactively vacate the $ 53,312 spousal maintenance obligation, holding that the husband had "good cause" under the New York statute Domestic Relations Law Section 236(B)(9)(b) not to previously attack the spousal maintenance obligation until 2017, after the wife had taken him to court to enforce it.  The stretch of that statutory language might open the door to authorize the husband's delay; but it does not address a Court's statutory authority to nullify an official court judgment without considering whether an adverse change of circumstances had occurred. 

Get The Help You need

If you would like to talk with me, call my office in Manhattan at 212-499-0940 or contact me online.

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy

Email Us Today

Robert G. Smith, PLLC
950 Third Ave., 11th Floor
New York, NY 10022

Phone: 212-499-0940
Fax: 212-499-9091
New York Law Office Map