Justice Matthew D’Emic
Wife moved for an increase in maintenance to $50,000 per month, in this post-judgment petition arguing husband refused to grant her a Jewish divorce, a Get. Husband opposed arguing res judicata, and alleged in a contested divorce only a plaintiff was obligated to remove barriers to a defendant’s remarriage. The court rejected husband’s arguments, noting while the issue of the Get was previously raised, it was not adjudicated. Also, while Domestic Relations Law §253 only required a plaintiff to affirm removal of barriers to remarriage, courts utilized their equitable power to equalize the parties’ positions regardless of who filed an action under the DRL. Yet, the court stated despite its rejection of husband’s arguments, wife’s motion must fail, noting wife’s failure to live up to a bankruptcy court settlement prevented the court from awarding any equitable relief at this juncture. Further, it found husband affirmed he would deliver a Get. However, wife contended husband’s summoning of her to a rabbinical court was a sham, and he was likely to extract financial concessions from her in return. The court noted as the parties recently agreed to a “global settlement,” wife’s claims appeared conjectural, and the motion was denied.
