Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
The firm was successful in defending an action on behalf of a husband whose wife sought to have their separation agreement set aside and to modify the terms for spousal maintenance, child support, and equitable distribution contained therein. The Court found that the wife’s claim that the separation agreement was unfair and unconscionable were unsubstantiated, as the wife ratified the separation agreement by complying with its provisions and by failing to object to the separation agreement for more than three years. The Court further found that the wife had sufficient opportunity to review and verify the separation agreement’s contents and reaped its benefits for more than 3 years. As such, the separation agreement was not the product of fraud, duress, or overreaching and was therefore not unconscionable.
Our firm helped uphold a separation agreement that a wife wanted revised after 3 years of benefiting from it. This article is brought to you by Larkin, Ingrassia & Tepermayster, LLP.