Opinion
April 3, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Friedenberg, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
A review of the record indicates that there was ample evidence to support the Supreme Court's determination that the plaintiff was entitled to a divorce based on the defendant's cruel and inhuman treatment and constructive abandonment (Domestic Relations Law § 170, [2]; Stauble v. Stauble, 72 A.D.2d 581; Chinnis v. Chinnis, 119 A.D.2d 965). Further, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's counterclaim for divorce, as well as her requests for maintenance and equitable distribution, based upon a failure of proof.
On the instant appeal, the defendant argues that she was denied the effective assistance of counsel. It is well settled, however, that with certain narrow exceptions not applicable to the case at bar, the right to the effective assistance of counsel does not extend to civil actions (see generally, Matter of Brown v Lavine, 37 N.Y.2d 317; Walston v. Axelrod, 103 A.D.2d 769, 770). Mangano, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.