Opinion
April 5, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.).
Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof which granted the defendant's application for a downward modification of his maintenance obligation and substituting therefore a provision denying the application; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiff.
The parties' judgment of divorce incorporated by reference, but did not merge, a stipulation of settlement between the parties concerning, inter alia, the defendant's maintenance obligation. The defendant, inter alia, sought to modify the judgment by reducing his maintenance obligation. However, in support of his application, the defendant failed to demonstrate that continued payment of the obligation would result in extreme hardship ( see, Mishrick v. Mishrick, 251 A.D.2d 558; Sheridan v. Sheridan, 225 A.D.2d 604; Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [9] [b]). Accordingly, such relief should have been denied.
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.
Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.