From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sass v. Sass

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 22, 2009
66 A.D.3d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 1254.

October 22, 2009.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), entered July 25, 2008, dissolving the parties' marriage and incorporating the terms of a stipulation entered into March 19, 2008 settling, inter alia, custody issues, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Law Office of Yonatan S. Levoritz, P.C., Brooklyn (Michael P. Biancanello of counsel), for appellant.

Winter Grossman PLLC, Garden City (Jerome B. Winter of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, Renwick and Richter, JJ.


Defendant's argument that the judgment includes terms that are inconsistent with the stipulation of settlement and therefore does not accurately reflect the stipulation is not preserved for appellate review ( see 22 NYCRR 202.48 [c] [2]; Rowley v Amrhein, 64 AD3d 469).

Defendant failed to establish that she entered into the stipulation under duress ( see Mahon v Moorman, 234 AD2d 1) or that she was not advised of the Child Support Standards Act (codified in Domestic Relations Law § 240 [1-b] and Family Ct Act § 413 [h]). Nor does she appear to be objecting to any specific component of the parties' child support arrangement ( see Blaikie v Mortner, 274 AD2d 95, 99-100, 101).


Summaries of

Sass v. Sass

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 22, 2009
66 A.D.3d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Sass v. Sass

Case Details

Full title:PETER SASS, Respondent, v. SOPHIA SASS, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 22, 2009

Citations

66 A.D.3d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7500
886 N.Y.S.2d 597

Citing Cases

Wydra v. Brach

The appellants have not identified any nonfinal judgment or order which is brought up for review and from…

Wydra v. Brach

The appellants have not identified any nonfinal judgment or order which is brought up for review and from…