Boris Volfman v Candice Volfman

Volfman v Volfman 2006 NY Slip Op 04828 [30 AD3d 505] Decided on June 13, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 13, 2006
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STEPHEN G. CRANE, J.P.
REINALDO E. RIVERA
PETER B. SKELOS
MARK C. DILLON, JJ.
2005-03247 DECISION & ORDER

[*1]Boris Volfman, respondent,

v

Candice Volfman, appellant. (Index No. 4876/03)




Morris Markowitz, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

In a consolidated action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gartenstein, J.H.O.), dated March 2, 2005, which, inter alia, after a nonjury trial, determined that the separation agreement between the parties dated May 24, 2002, was valid.

ORDERED that the interlocutory judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

" A separation agreement or stipulation of settlement which is fair on its face will be enforced according to its terms unless there is proof of fraud, duress, overreaching or unconscionability'" (Brennan-Duffy v Duffy, 22 AD3d 699, quoting Linder v Linder, 297 AD2d 710, 711; see Christian v Christian, 42 NY2d 63, 71-73). Here, the defendant failed to demonstrate any ground to set aside the parties' separation agreement (see Cohn v Cohn, 15 AD3d 332). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly determined that the separation agreement was valid (see Levine v Levine, 56 NY2d 42, 48; Warren v Rabinowitz, 228 AD2d 492).
CRANE, J.P., RIVERA, SKELOS and DILLON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court