Opinion
June 26, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, with costs to the former wife.
"A separation agreement is a contract subject to the principles of contract construction and interpretation (Rainbow v. Swisher, 72 N.Y.2d 106, 109). Where the contract is clear and unambiguous on its face, the courts must determine the intent of the parties from within the four corners of the instrument (id.; Nichols v Nichols, 306 N.Y. 490, 496, reh denied 307 N.Y. 677)" (Matter of Meccico v. Meccico, 76 N.Y.2d 822, 823-824). The parties' separation agreement clearly indicates that the parties intended that they were to be equally obligated to pay the monthly expenses related to the marital residence until it is sold. Thus, we agree with the Supreme Court that the former wife's remarriage does not relieve the former husband of his obligation to pay his share of the expenses related to the marital residence. Moreover, the former husband is not entitled to one-half of the rental value of the marital residence. The former wife's new husband, as a guest or invitee of the former wife, is entitled to live at the premises rent free (see, Soyer v. Perricone, 193 A.D.2d 665).
We find that the husband's conduct in commencing this action was not frivolous (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c]).
The parties' remaining contentions are without merit. Thompson, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.