Modifying Child Support in New York: What Courts Require When Income Decreases

When financial circumstances change, parents often seek a modification of child support obligations. But in New York, obtaining a downward modification is far from automatic. Courts apply strict standards to ensure that a reduction in child support is not used as a way to avoid responsibility.

A recent appellate decision, Harmelink v. Harmelink 2025 NY Slip Op 04708 (2025), highlights the burden a parent faces when claiming a substantial decrease in income.

The Legal Standard for Child Support Modification in New York

Under Family Court Act § 451(3), a child support order may be modified if:

1. There has been a substantial change in circumstances, or

2. Either party’s gross income has changed by 15% or more since the order was entered, last modified, or adjusted.

At first glance, a decrease of 15% or more may seem enough to justify a reduction. But New York law requires additional proof:

• The decrease in income must have occurred through no fault of the parent, and

• The parent must show diligent efforts to find comparable employment consistent with their qualifications and earning capacity.

The Court’s Findings in Harmelink v. Harmelink

In Harmelink, the father claimed his income dropped by 55%, well above the statutory threshold. However, the court found his request deficient because he:

• Offered only vague, conclusory statements that he was “compelled” to leave his employment.

• Failed to provide competent proof (such as termination letters, business records, or credible testimony) that the job loss was beyond his control.

• Did not demonstrate any diligent effort to obtain comparable work in line with his prior earning capacity.

Because of these failures, the court denied his request without even granting a hearing.

What This Means for Parents Seeking a Downward Modification

This case underscores an important lesson: a payor parent cannot simply claim financial hardship without evidence. Courts require concrete, verifiable documentation. Examples of what may help include:

• Proof of termination or layoff (e.g., employer’s letter).

• Records showing applications for new employment or interviews.

• Evidence of reduced industry opportunities, such as job market data.

• Documentation of re-training or efforts to transition into a comparable field.

Without this, courts may assume the parent has voluntarily reduced income, a scenario that rarely justifies lowering child support.

Why New York Courts Apply Strict Child Support Modification Standards

New York courts place the child’s best interests above all else. Since child support is designed to maintain a child’s standard of living, judges are wary of reductions that could deprive the child of necessary financial resources. By requiring proof of both involuntary job loss and diligent job search efforts, the law ensures that only genuine hardships lead to a modification.

Key Takeaway

If you are seeking a child support modification in New York City and the surrounding counties:

• A decrease in income over 15% gives you the right to apply,

• But you must prove it was not your fault, and

• Show that you are actively working to restore your earning capacity.

Failure to meet these standards, as seen in Harmelink v. Harmelink, can result in denial of relief without a hearing.

Speak to an Experienced New York Child Support Attorney

Child support modification cases are fact-sensitive and highly scrutinized by the courts. If you’ve experienced a job loss, business downturn, or other change in income, it’s critical to prepare the right documentation and legal arguments from the start.

At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we represent parents across New York City and surrounding counties in child support and custody matters. We understand how courts apply these standards and can guide you through the process to protect your rights while ensuring your child’s needs are met.

📞 Call us today at 888.501.3292 or schedule a FREE CASE EVALUATION.

Shared Custody Child Support Awards in New York: Understanding How the Law Applies

Child support in New York can be complex—especially in shared 50/50 custody situations where parenting time is divided between both parents. Many parents mistakenly believe that equal or near-equal parenting time automatically means no child support will be awarded. New York law says otherwise.

How New York Defines Custody in Child Support Cases

Under New York’s Child Support Standards Act (CSSA), the court must first determine who the custodial parent is for purposes of calculating child support even in shared or joint custody situations.

• Custodial Parent: The parent with whom the child spends a majority of overnights in a year.

• Noncustodial Parent: The parent who has fewer overnights. This parent is generally responsible for paying child support.

Importantly, the law focuses on overnights, not waking hours, when determining who has primary custody for child support purposes.

The CSSA Formula Still Applies to Shared Custody

In Bast v. Rossoff, New York’s highest court made clear that the CSSA formula applies to shared custody arrangements just as it does in sole custody cases. The court first calculates the basic child support obligation using the standard three-step formula, then determines which parent is the custodial parent.

If One Parent Has the Majority of Overnights

That parent is the custodial parent and will generally receive child support from the other parent regardless of the label “joint custody” in the parenting plan.

If Parenting Time Is Truly Equal

In cases where neither parent has the majority of overnights, courts often follow the rule from Baraby v. Baraby:

• The parent with the higher income is deemed the noncustodial parent and will pay child support to the other parent.

This approach has been adopted by the Second, Third, and Fourth Departments of the Appellate Division.

The First Department’s Approach

The First Department (covering Manhattan and the Bronx) follows a stricter rule, as seen in Rubin v. Salla:

• A custodial parent cannot be ordered to pay child support to a noncustodial parent.

• Overnights are the decisive factor, not waking hours or economic disparity.

This means that even if the custodial parent earns significantly more, they won’t be ordered to pay child support to the other parent unless the overnights are truly equal.

Key Takeaways for Parents in Shared Custody Cases

• Equal time does not always mean no child support.

• Overnights control, not daytime hours.

• If parenting time is exactly equal, the parent with the higher income usually pays child support.

• Different appellate courts in New York may apply slightly different interpretations, so where your case is heard matters.

• Courts will not deviate from the statutory formula unless following it would be “unjust or inappropriate” under CSSA paragraph (f) factors.

How This Impacts Your Case

If you are in a shared custody situation or negotiating one, it’s critical to understand that child support can still be awarded even when parenting time is split evenly. The court will examine the exact schedule, count overnights, and review each parent’s income before making a determination.

Because appellate interpretations vary, and because calculating child support in shared custody cases requires precise legal strategy, having an experienced New York matrimonial and family law attorney on your side can make a substantial difference.

Contact Us for Guidance on Shared Custody Child Support in New York

At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we have extensive experience navigating the complexities of child support in shared custody situations. Whether you are negotiating an agreement or preparing for litigation, we will work to protect your rights and ensure the child support calculation is fair.

📞 Call us today at 888.501.3292 or schedule your free consultation.

Relocation and Custody Modifications in New York: Lessons from Jasmine M. v. Albert M. (2025)

Relocation cases in child custody disputes remain some of the most challenging matters in New York Family Court. The recent First Department decision in Matter of Jasmine M. v. Albert M. (2025) offers valuable insight into how courts analyze requests to modify custody when one parent seeks to move, especially when that move would impact the other parent’s access to the child.

In this case, the mother sought to relocate with the parties’ child, prompting a custody modification proceeding. The father opposed the move, arguing that relocation would disrupt his regular parenting time and negatively affect his relationship with the child. The Family Court initially denied the mother’s relocation request, finding that it was not in the child’s best interests. The mother appealed.

On appeal, the First Department examined whether the proposed relocation would serve the child’s best interests by considering factors established under New York law, including:

The reasons for the move

The impact on the child’s relationship with both parents

The potential economic, educational, and emotional benefits of relocation

The feasibility of preserving the noncustodial parent’s relationship with the child through meaningful visitation

The Court’s Decision

The appellate court upheld the denial of the mother’s relocation request. It found that the mother failed to meet her burden of demonstrating that the move would improve the child’s life in a way that outweighed the loss of regular and consistent contact with the father. The court emphasized that:

The child’s close relationship with both parents was a critical factor.

The proposed relocation plan did not provide adequate safeguards for maintaining the father-child bond.

The evidence did not convincingly show that the relocation would provide significant educational or financial benefits.

Impact on Future Relocation Cases in New York

This decision reinforces several important principles for parents considering relocation in New York custody cases:

1. Best Interests Standard is Paramount – The moving parent must provide compelling evidence that the relocation will substantially enhance the child’s well-being.

2. Burden of Proof Lies with the Relocating Parent – Without clear, credible evidence of benefits to the child, courts are unlikely to approve relocation.

3. Preserving the Parent-Child Relationship is Key – Courts will scrutinize whether the relocation plan realistically allows the noncustodial parent to maintain a strong relationship with the child.

4. Economic and Educational Benefits Must Be Concrete – Speculative or marginal improvements will not outweigh the loss of consistent access to a parent.

For parents in New York, Matter of Jasmine M. v. Albert M. is a clear reminder: if you are seeking to relocate with your child, you must be prepared to present a detailed, well-supported plan showing that the move is in the child’s best interests and that meaningful contact with the other parent will be preserved.

Considering Relocation or Facing a Custody Modification?
The experienced family law attorneys at Mindin & Mindin, P.C. can guide you through New York’s complex relocation and custody modification process. Contact us today at 888.501.3292 or schedule a free consultation on our calendar.

How New York Courts Handle Child Support and Spousal Maintenance Above the Statutory Income Cap: A Look at DeCrescenzo v. Suslak

When child support and spousal maintenance are at stake in high-net-worth divorces, New York courts have wide discretion—especially when combined parental income exceeds the statutory cap. A recent case from the Appellate Division, Third Department, DeCrescenzo v. Suslak, 2025 NY Slip Op 03114, provides critical guidance on how judges weigh lifestyle, earning capacity, and financial needs when setting support awards well above standard guidelines.

Key Takeaways from DeCrescenzo v. Suslak

1. Courts May Award Child Support on Income Far Above the Cap

In this case, the court upheld a child support award based on a combined parental income of $635,000, far above New York’s statutory cap of $183,000 (as of 2025). The award of $13,657 per month in child support was supported by:

The children’s need to maintain a lifestyle consistent with the family’s pre-divorce standard of living;

The significant disparity in incomes between the parties;

The father’s ability to pay based on his high earnings (nearly $950,000 annually).

This ruling confirms that when high earners divorce, the court will go well beyond the cap if the children’s needs and lifestyle justify it.

2. Imputing Income: Not Always Required

The husband argued that the court should have imputed a full-time salary of $95,000 to the wife, a part-time physical therapist with a master’s degree. But the court declined, citing her ongoing role as the children's primary caregiver and the lack of evidence that she was avoiding employment in bad faith.

This reaffirms that childcare responsibilities and good-faith part-time employment can justify the court declining to impute full-time income to a lower-earning spouse.

3. Maintenance Awards Reflect Disparity and Lifestyle

The court awarded the wife $5,000 per month in spousal maintenance, consisting of the statutory presumptive amount plus a discretionary enhancement. Factors influencing the award included:

The parties’ significant income disparity;

The wife’s caregiving duties and limited earnings;

The pre-divorce standard of living;

Loss of health insurance coverage post-divorce.

Courts consider both short-term transition needs and long-term economic disparities when awarding spousal maintenance in high-income divorces.

4. No Imputed Investment Income Without Proof

The husband attempted to argue that the wife could invest her distributive award and earn income. However, the court rejected this as speculative, noting the funds had not yet been invested and were potentially earmarked for a future home purchase.

Courts need concrete evidence, not assumptions, to impute investment income in support calculations.

What This Means for High-Income Divorce in New York

If you're involved in a divorce where parental income exceeds the statutory cap, know that the court has the power to:

-Deviate significantly from guideline support amounts;

-Consider lifestyle, needs, and earning capacity over formulas;

-Decline to impute income without clear evidence of underemployment or bad faith.

Judges also take a fact-specific, especially when children’s well-being and caregiving responsibilities are involved. There is a significant amount of judicial discretion here so this fact pattern can yield different results based on your jurist.

Talk to a High-Income Divorce Attorney in New York

High-net-worth divorce cases require strategic advocacy and a deep understanding of New York's discretionary approach to child support and maintenance above the cap. At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we regularly represent clients in complex financial and custody matters—including cases involving seven-figure incomes, luxury assets, and contested support awards.

📞 Call us today at 888.501.3292
💼 Or schedule a confidential case evaluation 💼

Protect your financial future and ensure a fair outcome—especially when the stakes are high.

Billionaire Divorce Without a Prenup: What Would Happen to David Geffen in New York?

A recent headline has captivated attention: Billionaire David Geffen, 82, files for divorce from his 32-year-old husband without a prenup. The absence of a prenuptial agreement, particularly in a high-net-worth scenario, often generates speculation about how much wealth is potentially at risk. But does filing for divorce without a prenup truly put billions of dollars in jeopardy? Let’s break down the real implications, especially if this scenario played out under New York divorce law.

David Geffen Files for Divorce from Husband David Armstrong

David Geffen’s Situation: What’s Actually at Risk?

David Geffen has an estimated net worth of approximately $8.7 billion. The bulk of Geffen’s wealth was accumulated decades before his recent marriage. Under New York law, this distinction is crucial, as only marital assets—those assets acquired during the marriage—are subject to equitable distribution in a divorce. Separate property, which includes:

• Assets owned before marriage

• Inheritances

• Gifts specifically to one spouse

• Personal injury compensation

generally remain untouched by divorce proceedings.

In Geffen’s case, since his significant fortune existed before his marriage, most of his assets would remain safely classified as separate property. Without a prenup, however, the real issue becomes distinguishing clearly what is separate and what might inadvertently become marital due to commingling or unclear boundaries.

Potential Issues Without a Prenup in New York

1. Commingling of Assets

Without a prenup, there’s always a risk that separate assets may inadvertently become marital assets. For example, placing separate funds into joint accounts or using them to improve marital property might complicate the classification of those funds, potentially opening the door for claims by a spouse.

2. Increased Legal Complexity and Cost

Even if most assets are clearly separate, the absence of a prenuptial agreement means disputes about asset classification or potential commingling can lead to extensive—and expensive—litigation. Legal battles over financial disclosures and valuation of assets can become costly and stressful, even for a billionaire.

3. Spousal Support Considerations

Without a prenup clearly outlining expectations, spousal support (maintenance) becomes a more contentious issue. In New York, maintenance awards depend upon the duration of the marriage, the lifestyle enjoyed by both parties, the health and earning capacity of each spouse, and other equitable factors. While a short marriage like Geffen’s reduces potential support obligations, it doesn't eliminate them entirely.

4. Privacy Concerns

Without a prenuptial agreement, divorce litigation can become public and contentious, potentially exposing personal financial details and other sensitive information. Prenups often simplify matters, preserving privacy and ensuring swift, amicable resolutions.

The Takeaway: Protect Your Assets with a Prenup

David Geffen’s divorce highlights an essential truth: even when significant wealth is primarily held separately, the absence of a prenuptial agreement can complicate the divorce process. A carefully drafted prenup can eliminate uncertainty by clearly defining separate and marital assets, reducing the risk of unintended financial exposure, costly litigation, and public scrutiny.

If you’re considering marriage—especially if you have significant assets or anticipate acquiring substantial wealth—a prenuptial agreement is your best protection. Don’t leave your financial future to chance.

Secure Your Future: Get Expert Legal Advice Today

At Mindin & Mindin, we specialize in drafting comprehensive prenuptial agreements tailored to your unique circumstances. If you have questions about protecting your assets before marriage, contact our experienced matrimonial attorneys today to schedule a consultation.

Don’t wait until it’s too late—contact us to secure your future.

Can the Court Order the Sale of Your Marital Home During a Divorce in New York? Understanding the Unusual Decision in FR v. AR (2025)

In a recent groundbreaking matrimonial decision in FR v. AR (2025 NY Slip Op 50549(U)), Judge Dane of the Supreme Court of Nassau County made a remarkable ruling: he permitted the sale of a marital home during a pending divorce. This decision is particularly significant, as traditionally, New York courts have been hesitant to authorize the sale of marital homes before a divorce judgment, unless both spouses agree.

Here, we'll explore why this decision was made, what makes it so unique, and how it may impact your divorce proceedings in New York.

Background of the Case: Why Did the Court Allow the Sale?

The central issue in FR v. AR revolved around the financial distress surrounding the marital residence, which was titled solely in the husband's name. Historically, under the landmark case Kahn v. Kahn (1977), New York courts could not order the sale of a marital home owned jointly as tenants by the entirety unless the marital status was legally altered through divorce, annulment, or separation.

But what if the home isn't jointly owned? The Court in FR v. AR had to decide if it could distinguish this case from Kahn since the property was solely titled in the husband's name. Ultimately, the Court determined it could—and ordered the immediate sale of the home. This decision broke new ground by clarifying that courts possess the authority to act to preserve marital assets during the divorce process, especially in cases of financial misconduct or risk of foreclosure.

Key Factors Influencing the Court’s Decision:

Several critical considerations led the Court to its unprecedented decision to permit the home’s immediate sale:

1. Single Ownership (Sole Title)

Unlike typical scenarios where spouses hold joint title (tenancy by the entirety), in this case, the marital residence was solely titled to the husband. This single ownership was key, allowing the Court to distinguish this case from the Kahn precedent and opening the door for judicial intervention to protect marital equity.

2. Risk of Financial Waste and Foreclosure

The husband stopped paying the mortgage shortly after initiating divorce proceedings, despite earning approximately $166,000 per year. This deliberate non-payment placed the home in imminent danger of foreclosure. The Court found this financial misconduct unacceptable and ruled that immediate sale was necessary to preserve the significant equity ($288,000) in the home.

3. Equitable Distribution and Preservation of Marital Assets

New York’s Domestic Relations Law (DRL § 236B) mandates that marital property must be preserved to ensure a fair distribution at the end of a divorce. The Court emphasized its duty to prevent wasteful dissipation of assets—particularly when a spouse's deliberate actions endanger the equity of marital property. Here, the Court held that preserving the equity by selling the property immediately was far preferable to allowing foreclosure to erode its value.

4. Economic Partnership and Its Termination

Drawing from New York Court of Appeals decisions (Kaplan v. Kaplan, Mesholam v. Mesholam), the Court underscored that a marriage is an economic partnership, considered dissolved once divorce proceedings begin. As a result, courts have the authority—and even responsibility—to preserve marital assets during the divorce, including ordering the pendente lite (during litigation) sale of a marital home when necessary.

What Does This Mean for Divorcing Couples in New York?

This decision clearly signals to spouses that New York courts are increasingly willing to protect marital assets—even if it means ordering the sale of property before finalizing the divorce, particularly in cases of financial misconduct or impending foreclosure. The ruling demonstrates that:

• Courts may step in if there’s clear evidence of wasteful financial behavior.

• Sole title ownership can significantly affect the court’s authority to act during a divorce.

• Immediate sale of the marital residence can now be seen as an essential tool to prevent asset dissipation.

Why This Case Matters for Your Divorce

If you're facing a divorce and are concerned about preserving or managing your marital home, this decision highlights the importance of having a carefully strategized plan. It also illustrates that immediate action can be taken by the courts if one spouse attempts to financially harm the other through deliberate non-payment of mortgages or other financial obligations.

Takeaways for Protecting Your Interests:

• Act Quickly: If financial misconduct occurs, don't delay in seeking court intervention.

• Document Everything: Maintain thorough records of payments, communications, and attempts to mitigate financial loss.

• Understand Asset Ownership: Be aware of how assets are titled and the implications this has in divorce proceedings.

Protect Your Rights: Speak with an Experienced Matrimonial Attorney

Understanding asset preservation and division during divorce proceedings is complex, particularly given this new and evolving legal landscape. Our experienced matrimonial attorneys at Mindin & Mindin, P.C. are experts at protecting your financial interests and can guide you through every step of the process.

📞 Don’t leave your financial future to chance. Contact us at 888-501-3292 or CLICK HERE to schedule a confidential consultation.

Can a Foreign Language Prenuptial Agreement Be Upheld in New York?

New York Court Rules Foreign Language Prenuptial Agreement Unenforceable Without Certified Translation

A recent decision by the New York Supreme Court underscores a critical legal requirement that couples should carefully consider when creating prenuptial or postnuptial agreements—especially those drafted or executed in languages other than English.

The Case: Z.J.V. v. A.A.V. (2025)

In the matrimonial case of Z.J.V. v. A.A.V., decided on March 25, 2025, Justice James L. Hyer denied requests from both parties to either enforce or invalidate a marital agreement, emphasizing a fundamental procedural misstep: the parties' failure to comply with the stringent translation requirements set forth in the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR §2101(b)).

This case involved a marital agreement executed shortly after the parties' marriage in Germany. The agreement was prepared in both German and English, explicitly stating that neither language was intended to have priority in the event of discrepancies. However, when presenting the agreement to the court for enforcement, neither party provided the required certified translation or translator's affidavit mandated by CPLR §2101(b).

Why the Court Could Not Enforce the Agreement

The court's ruling hinged on the requirements of CPLR §2101(b), which mandates:

• All documents filed with New York courts must be in English.

• Documents originally written in a foreign language must include a certified English translation.

• Each translation must be accompanied by an affidavit from the translator, affirming their qualifications and the accuracy of the translation.

Justice Hyer emphasized this rule clearly, stating:

"Here, this Court has been presented with the Purported Marital Agreement, which contains both text in the English language and in a non-English language. Notably, the agreement itself confirms in a portion of the English language text that contradictions in the English language portion and non-English language portion may exist, underscoring the need for an English language translation. Nonetheless, both parties failed to comply with CPLR §2101(b)... preventing this Court from being able to review the document."

As a result, the court concluded the agreement had no evidentiary value and explicitly refused to either validate or invalidate it, leaving the parties without the legal clarity they sought.

Important Lessons for Couples with Foreign-Language Prenups

This decision highlights several crucial points for couples in New York who are considering or have already executed a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement involving multiple languages:

1. Translation Requirements Are Mandatory:
   New York courts require strict compliance with translation rules. Even if your agreement is bilingual, without proper translation and certification, it will be unenforceable.

2. Clear Priority of Language Matters:
   Agreements containing multiple languages should clearly state which language controls if discrepancies arise. Ambiguity can lead to further complications in enforcement or interpretation.

3. Documentation and Procedure Are Critical:
   Procedural mistakes, such as not providing the necessary translation affidavits, can prevent courts from even reviewing your agreement, let alone enforcing it.

Protect Your Prenuptial Agreement—Ensure Compliance Today

This ruling underscores the importance of precise and careful drafting of prenuptial and postnuptial agreements. Proper execution, including compliance with all procedural and linguistic requirements, is essential to ensure your agreement is upheld by the court.

At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., our experienced New York matrimonial attorneys can assist you with every step of your prenuptial or postnuptial agreement, including:

• Drafting and negotiating comprehensive agreements

• Ensuring compliance with New York law, including CPLR §2101(b)

• Facilitating proper translations and certifications

• Reviewing existing agreements to ensure enforceability

Don’t let procedural oversights jeopardize your financial future. Contact our team today for a confidential consultation about your prenuptial or postnuptial agreement.

Protect your assets, ensure clarity, and avoid costly litigation.
Call Mindin & Mindin, P.C., at 888-501-3292 to schedule your consultation today.

Understanding Contempt for Failure to Pay Child Support in New York

Child support is a critical element in ensuring the well-being of children following a divorce or separation. When a parent fails to comply with court-ordered support obligations, they may face serious legal consequences, including contempt charges. This article explores the standards New York courts use to determine contempt for failure to pay child support and outlines essential steps parents should consider if faced with such allegations.

What is Contempt in Child Support Cases?

Contempt, in the context of child support, occurs when a parent willfully fails to comply with a court-ordered child support obligation. In New York, establishing contempt requires the petitioner (the parent owed child support) to demonstrate that the other parent (the respondent) has intentionally and unjustifiably violated the child support order.

Prima Facie Evidence of Willful Violation

In New York, the initial burden is on the petitioner to prove that the respondent has willfully violated the child support order. Courts consider the failure to pay as prima facie evidence (i.e., evidence sufficient at first glance) of willfulness. As demonstrated in recent cases such as Nestor v. Nestor (2025) and Kaloustian v. Tsvetkov (2025), merely showing that payments were not made as ordered shifts the burden of proof to the respondent to justify non-payment.

The Burden Shifts to the Respondent

Once the petitioner presents evidence of non-payment, the respondent must demonstrate through competent, credible evidence their financial inability to comply. This means the respondent must show detailed documentation proving either unemployment, a substantial change in financial circumstances, or diligent yet unsuccessful efforts to secure adequate employment.

Key Takeaways from Recent Case Law:

1. Nestor v. Nestor – 2025 NY Slip Op 01369 - The Family Court confirmed that the father willfully violated the child support order after he failed to present credible and competent evidence proving financial hardship or inability to meet his support obligations.

2. Kaloustian v. Tsvetkov – 2025 NY Slip Op 01367 - Similarly, the father’s failure to provide proof of reasonable efforts to obtain gainful employment or demonstrate financial hardship resulted in the court finding him in contempt.

What Constitutes Competent, Credible Evidence?

To effectively rebut allegations of contempt for non-payment, respondents should:

• Provide comprehensive financial records, including bank statements, income tax returns, pay stubs, and records of expenses.

• Demonstrate efforts to gain employment or improve financial circumstances, such as evidence of job applications, interviews attended, or efforts to secure training and educational opportunities.

• Clearly document any medical conditions or unforeseen life circumstances impacting their ability to comply with the support order.

Consequences of Being Found in Contempt

If a court finds a parent in contempt for willful non-payment of child support, potential penalties may include:

• Wage garnishment

• Suspension of driver’s or professional licenses

• Seizure of tax refunds

• Additional fines and legal fees

• In extreme cases, imprisonment

Seeking Legal Assistance

Given the complexities surrounding contempt proceedings and the serious consequences involved, parents facing allegations of contempt, or parents owed child support, should seek professional legal assistance. Experienced family law attorneys here at Mindin & Mindin, P.C. can help navigate the legal process, gather necessary evidence, and advocate effectively in court.

Experienced Representation for Your Child Support Matter

Our law firm has substantial experience representing parents on both sides of child support contempt actions in New York courts. If you’re involved in a contempt action related to child support obligations, don't hesitate to reach out for a consultation. We can help clarify your rights, responsibilities, and the best strategies to achieve a fair and just resolution for you and your family.

Contact our office today to schedule your consultation and ensure your rights are protected.

Cryptocurrency and Divorce in New York

Cryptocurrency has rapidly evolved from an obscure investment tool to a mainstream asset class, significantly complicating divorce proceedings in New York. In high-net-worth divorces, digital assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum are increasingly prominent, introducing new challenges for attorneys, forensic experts, and spouses alike. At the Law Offices of Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we specialize in addressing the complexities cryptocurrency brings to marital property division, ensuring transparency and fairness throughout the divorce process.

Why Cryptocurrency Matters in Divorce

Cryptocurrencies present unique challenges during divorce due to their decentralized, anonymous nature and their inherent volatility. Unlike traditional financial assets held at banks or brokerages, cryptocurrency is often stored in digital wallets accessed only through private keys. This makes it particularly difficult for a spouse to ascertain the true extent of marital assets or to prevent hidden funds from slipping through unnoticed.

Due to the volatility of digital currencies, the timing of valuation can drastically impact divorce settlements. Given the rapid fluctuations common to cryptocurrency markets, what might appear fair today can become inequitable in mere weeks or even days.

Detecting Hidden Cryptocurrency Assets

One major challenge divorcing spouses face is identifying undisclosed cryptocurrency holdings. Typical investigative methods, like bank statement reviews or subpoenas, might not immediately reveal cryptocurrency assets. Instead, detailed forensic accounting, blockchain analytics, and digital investigations have become crucial in uncovering hidden crypto assets.

Attorneys at Mindin & Mindin, along with experienced forensic accountants, utilize specialized software tools and investigative techniques to trace cryptocurrency transactions. Subpoenas to popular crypto exchanges like Coinbase, Kraken, and Gemini and thorough analysis of tax returns, bank statements, and personal financial statements can reveal traces of undisclosed crypto assets.

Valuation Challenges in Cryptocurrency Divorce Cases

Even after identifying cryptocurrency assets, valuing them accurately poses another significant challenge. The value of Bitcoin or Ethereum can shift dramatically in short periods, affecting equitable distribution. Courts in New York typically look at the valuation date—the official date used for asset valuation—to ensure fairness. Given the volatility of crypto markets, setting a strategic valuation date is essential.

Moreover, valuing crypto-assets might require expert testimony and analysis. Working closely with cryptocurrency experts who can provide credible valuations and forecasts ensures that your interests are protected in the distribution of marital property.

How Courts Handle Cryptocurrency in Divorce

New York courts treat cryptocurrency as marital property subject to equitable distribution. This means the digital assets acquired during the marriage must be fairly divided, although not necessarily equally. Courts consider multiple factors, including when the cryptocurrency was purchased, how it was acquired (such as mining, purchase through exchanges, or ICO investments), and contributions each spouse made during the marriage.

Notably, cryptocurrency acquired before marriage is typically considered separate property, provided sufficient proof exists. This makes documentation critical—spouses holding cryptocurrency should maintain clear records to establish its origin and acquisition date.

Protecting Your Interests

The complexity of cryptocurrency in divorce proceedings means you need specialized legal counsel familiar with both family law and digital assets. At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., our team is adept at navigating these intricate cases. We partner with leading forensic specialists to accurately trace, value, and secure your rightful share of crypto-assets.

Cryptocurrency in divorces is a relatively new legal terrain, but with a knowledgeable attorney and the right expert guidance, you can ensure a fair division of digital and traditional marital assets.

If you're dealing with a divorce involving cryptocurrency in New York, contact the experienced attorneys at Mindin & Mindin today. We understand the intricacies of crypto-assets and are dedicated to safeguarding your financial future.

The Best Interests of the Child: Why Courts Favor Stability and Co-Parenting in Custody Disputes

When determining child custody, courts in New York focus on one overarching principle: the best interests of the child. While this standard may seem straightforward, courts weigh multiple factors to ensure a custody arrangement promotes stability, emotional well-being, and continued parental involvement. A recent case, Acevedo v. Cassidy (2nd Dep’t 2025), underscores how judges evaluate key considerations, particularly a parent's ability to foster a relationship between the child and the noncustodial parent.

In Acevedo, the court awarded sole legal and physical custody to the father, finding that he was better positioned to provide stability and facilitate co-parenting. The mother challenged the decision, arguing that she was fit to retain custody. However, the court determined that several factors weighed in favor of the father.

One of the most critical aspects of any custody dispute is a parent's willingness to encourage a meaningful relationship between the child and the other parent. Courts are highly concerned when one parent appears to hinder or limit the other parent’s role in the child's life. In this case, the father demonstrated that he was more likely to share information about the child’s academic progress and general well-being, while the mother had failed to maintain consistency in her involvement.

Another significant factor was stability. The father had steady employment with a predictable schedule and lived close to the child's school, allowing for a consistent routine. In contrast, the mother had moved multiple times throughout the litigation, creating uncertainty regarding housing and school logistics. Courts tend to favor the parent who can provide the most stable home environment, as frequent relocations can disrupt a child’s emotional and educational development.

Additionally, the practical realities of each parent's living situation played a role in the court's decision. The mother's living arrangements involved a significant commute to the child’s school, whereas the father’s home provided a more convenient and stable setting. Courts recognize that long commutes can impact a child's daily routine, adding unnecessary stress and logistical challenges.

The case also highlights the importance of credibility in custody proceedings. Judges rely heavily on testimony, observing the sincerity, temperament, and overall character of both parents. When credibility issues arise—such as inconsistent statements or behavior that suggests an unwillingness to cooperate—courts may lean toward the parent who presents a stronger case for promoting the child's well-being.

Ultimately, Acevedo v. Cassidy reinforces the principle that custody decisions are based on the totality of circumstances. While no single factor determines the outcome, courts prioritize stability, a parent’s ability to facilitate co-parenting, and the overall living environment. Parents seeking custody should be prepared to demonstrate that they can provide a secure, nurturing, and consistent upbringing while ensuring that the child maintains a meaningful relationship with both parents.

If you are facing a custody dispute, it is crucial to understand how courts evaluate these cases and to present a compelling argument that aligns with the best interests standard. Consulting with an experienced family law attorney at Mindin & Mindin can help you navigate the legal process and build a strong case for custody. Contact us for a free consultation.

Relocation and Parenting Time: Key Takeaways from Dusten T. v. Trisha U.

Relocation and Parenting Time: Key Takeaways from Dusten T. v. Trisha U.

When a parent moves a significant distance away from their child, it often complicates custody and visitation arrangements. Courts must balance a child’s best interests with a relocating parent’s right to move, and a recent case—Dusten T. v. Trisha U.—illustrates how New York courts handle these complex situations.

In this case, a mother’s relocation 2.5 hours away from her child’s primary residence became a key issue in determining parenting time and transportation responsibilities. The court crafted a custody schedule that aimed to preserve the mother’s relationship with the child, while also considering the logistical challenges posed by her move. Below, we examine the court’s decision and what it means for parents facing similar custody and relocation disputes.

Custody Schedules and Relocation: Balancing Parenting Time and Practicality

Family Court originally granted the mother two nonconsecutive weeks during summer vacation, alternating weekends, and every Wednesday evening for parenting time. However, because the mother lived over two hours away and did not own a vehicle, the court modified the schedule to eliminate Wednesday evening visits and compensate by awarding her two additional weeks during summer break. This adjustment was made to ensure that the mother could still maintain a meaningful relationship with her child, while recognizing that midweek visits were impractical given the travel time involved.

This decision underscores a crucial point in New York custody law: the feasibility of a visitation schedule matters as much as the fairness of time allocation. If a parent’s chosen location makes regular visitation logistically difficult, the court may need to adjust parenting time to reflect what is realistic and sustainable.

Who Bears the Burden of Transportation?

Another key issue in this case was which parent should be responsible for transporting the child for visits. The court placed the full burden of transportation on the mother, reasoning that she had voluntarily moved far away. The mother argued that this was unfair, particularly because she did not own a vehicle and had to rely on friends or family for rides.

However, the court upheld its decision, emphasizing that the parent who relocates generally assumes responsibility for the increased travel burden. In cases like this, courts are unlikely to impose additional transportation duties on the non-moving parent, as doing so would unfairly shift the consequences of the relocation onto them.

Key Legal Takeaways from Dusten T. v. Trisha U.:

1. Parenting schedules must be practical and enforceable.

   • If a parent relocates too far for frequent, short visits, the court may adjust custody schedules to allow for longer but less frequent visitation periods.

2. Relocating parents generally bear the burden of transportation.

   • A parent who chooses to move further away is often responsible for the costs and logistics of transporting the child for visitation.

3. The best interests of the child remain the primary concern.

   • Courts prioritize the child's well-being by ensuring that they maintain a strong relationship with both parents, while also keeping logistical burdens reasonable for all parties involved.

How This Decision Affects Parents Considering Relocation

If you are a custodial or noncustodial parent considering relocating, this case serves as a reminder that your move will impact custody and visitation arrangements. Before making a major move, consider:

• How will the relocation affect your current custody agreement?

• Will midweek or weekend visits still be feasible?

• Who will handle transportation, and can you meet the logistical demands?

If you are facing a relocation issue in your custody case, consulting with an experienced New York family law attorney can help you navigate the legal complexities and work toward a parenting schedule that fits your new circumstances.

At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we specialize in custody modifications, relocation cases, and ensuring that parenting time arrangements serve the best interests of both parents and children. Contact us today to discuss how we can help you secure a workable custody and visitation plan.

📞 Call us at 888-501-3292 for a consultation.

The Dangers of Email Tracking in Family Law Cases: A Landmark Court Ruling

In a groundbreaking decision, the New York Supreme Court has addressed the use of email tracking technology in matrimonial litigation, marking a first-of-its-kind ruling that could have significant implications for future divorce and custody battles. In D.P. v. S.P., 2025 WL 570068 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Feb. 20, 2025), the court examined how email tracking—a commonly used digital tool—can be leveraged to obtain information about a recipient’s location, movements, and private activities, raising serious concerns about privacy, stalking, and even potential violations of New York's family offense laws.

What Is Email Tracking and How Does It Work?

Email tracking software, such as Streak, works by embedding an invisible tracking pixel within an email. When the recipient opens the email, the sender receives data on when and where it was viewed, how many times it was accessed, and even the recipient’s approximate location. The court noted that this type of technology can severely compromise an individual’s privacy, particularly in contentious divorce and family law disputes where parties may attempt to track or monitor each other’s whereabouts.

The Case: How Email Tracking Became a Legal Issue

In the case of D.P. v. S.P., the Defendant admitted to using email tracking technology to monitor emails sent to the Plaintiff during their divorce proceedings. This revelation led to significant legal scrutiny, as the court recognized that such tracking could be a form of unauthorized surveillance that might violate New York’s address confidentiality protections—laws designed to protect victims of domestic violence, stalking, and harassment.

The court drew a connection between email tracking and the New York State Address Confidentiality Program, a law that allows victims of domestic violence, human trafficking, or stalking to use a substitute mailing address to prevent their abusers from finding them. The ruling emphasized that even though email tracking does not provide an exact physical address, the ability to determine a recipient's city-level location could be used to undermine these confidentiality protections.

Could Email Tracking Be Considered Stalking Under New York Law?

The court explored whether using email tracking software could constitute a family offense, particularly under New York Penal Law’s stalking statutes. Under New York Penal Law § 120.45(2), a person commits stalking in the fourth degree if they engage in a pattern of conduct that:

• Causes emotional harm to the victim.

• Follows or monitors the victim’s movements using tracking technology.

• Has been previously warned to stop such conduct.

Although the court did not explicitly rule that email tracking constitutes stalking in this case, it warned that if either party continued using email tracking after being instructed to stop, it could lead to a family offense determination, contempt of court, and possible sanctions.

What This Decision Means for Family Law Litigants

This case sets an important precedent by recognizing the potential misuse of email tracking in matrimonial disputes and its possible legal consequences. Family law litigants should be aware that:

1. Email tracking could be deemed an invasion of privacy and might violate legal protections in divorce and custody cases.

2. Parties involved in family court matters should avoid using tracking technology to monitor their ex-spouses or co-parents, as it may be considered unauthorized surveillance or stalking.

3. Courts are taking digital privacy concerns seriously, particularly when they intersect with domestic violence protections and address confidentiality laws.

The ruling in D.P. v. S.P. highlights a modern legal issue that many may not have considered—how digital tracking tools can be misused in high-conflict divorce cases. The court’s decision acknowledges that while technology has evolved, so too must the law to ensure that these tools are not weaponized to invade privacy, intimidate, or harass.

If you are involved in a divorce, custody dispute, or family law matter and believe you may be a victim of unauthorized tracking or digital surveillance, legal guidance is critical. At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we stay at the forefront of emerging legal issues to ensure our clients' rights and privacy are protected.

🔹 For a confidential consultation, call us at 888-501-3292 or visit our Contact Page

Sacha Baron Cohen and Isla Fisher’s Divorce: A Surprisingly Smooth Split (Very Nice!)

After more than two decades together, Hollywood couple Sacha Baron Cohen and Isla Fisher have officially called it quits. Their $75 million divorce, despite initial reports of turmoil, is reportedly moving along smoothly—which is an unexpected twist for a couple navigating high-profile fame, shared children, and significant wealth. Unlike some celebrity splits that turn into full-scale legal battles, their approach appears to be amicable, private, and well-coordinated—a rarity in Hollywood.

While divorce is never a laughing matter, it’s hard not to acknowledge the irony of one of comedy’s most outrageous provocateurs (best known for playing Borat, Ali G, and Bruno) handling his personal separation with dignity and discretion. Maybe we should all take a page from their playbook—though preferably not one of Borat’s infamous "marriage guides."

Getting divorced from maaaa wiiiiiife

A Love Story That Began with Laughs (and Lasted Over 20 Years!)

Sacha Baron Cohen and Isla Fisher first met at a party in Sydney back in 2001, proving that even in Hollywood, the best relationships sometimes start in unexpected places. The connection was instant, leading to an engagement in 2004 and, after a long wait, a romantic wedding in Paris in 2010. Together, they raised three children while juggling their busy acting careers, red carpet appearances, and Sacha’s often controversial brand of humor.

While their public personas were vastly different—Isla known for her charming roles in films like Wedding Crashers and Confessions of a Shopaholic, and Sacha notorious for his outrageous satirical characters—their marriage worked for more than two decades. Unfortunately, like even the best "great success!" stories, this one has come to an end.

A Divorce Handled with Grace (and Maybe a Few Jokes)

Announcing a breakup in Hollywood is tricky, but Sacha and Isla did it in style. Instead of long-winded press statements or explosive tell-all interviews, they posted a tongue-in-cheek message on social media:

"After a long tennis match lasting over twenty years, we are finally putting our rackets down."

If there’s a lesson to be learned here, it’s that humor can help even in difficult situations. Divorce is never easy, but approaching it with mutual respect and a commitment to co-parenting can make all the difference—especially when children are involved.

What Happens Next? Legal and Financial Considerations in High-Net-Worth Divorces

Though they’ve kept the details private, a $75 million divorce settlement is no small matter. Dividing assets in high-net-worth divorces often involves:

• Complex financial negotiations over investments, properties, and earnings.

• Child custody arrangements that prioritize the well-being of their three children.

• Prenuptial agreements (if they had one), which could determine how assets are divided.

In many celebrity divorces, protecting personal wealth, career earnings, and intellectual property is key. Whether or not they had a prenup, their relatively smooth process suggests that they planned their separation carefully and strategically—something that any divorcing couple, famous or not, can learn from.

Lessons from the Cohen-Fisher Divorce: What We Can Learn

Divorces often become messy, public, and emotionally draining, but Sacha and Isla’s case shows that with the right approach, things don’t have to spiral out of control. Their focus on co-parenting and mutual respect is a reminder that even when love ends, family responsibilities remain.

While Sacha Baron Cohen is best known for pushing boundaries and causing chaos, it seems that when it comes to his real-life divorce, he has chosen a path of cooperation and calm. Maybe he’ll turn this experience into a mockumentary someday—but for now, it looks like both he and Isla are moving forward in a way that prioritizes peace over drama.

If you're facing a divorce of your own, whether it’s amicable or complex, legal guidance is crucial. At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we specialize in New York divorce cases, including:

✅ High-net-worth asset division
✅ Child custody and support
✅ Spousal maintenance and financial settlements
✅ Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements

📞 Call us today at 888-501-3292 for a confidential consultation. While we may not have Borat-level comedic timing, we do have exceptional legal expertise to help you navigate your next chapter with clarity and confidence.

Forensic Evaluations in Custody Cases: How Preparation Can Make a Difference

Understanding Forensic Evaluations in Child Custody Disputes

When parents are involved in a contested custody battle, the court may order a forensic evaluation to assess each parent's fitness, co-parenting abilities, and the child's best interests. A forensic custody evaluation is conducted by a court-appointed mental health professional who interviews parents, children, and relevant third parties while also reviewing documentation and administering psychological assessments.

These evaluations can significantly impact custody determinations, making proper preparation critical. While the forensic evaluator's role is to provide the court with an objective analysis, how parents present themselves and their parenting approach during the evaluation can shape the outcome.

How the Law Offices of Mindin & Mindin, P.C. Can Assist You

At the Law Offices of Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we understand the complexities of forensic evaluations and offer consulting services to help parents navigate this process effectively. As experienced New York matrimonial and family law attorneys, we provide strategic guidance to ensure that clients approach the evaluation with confidence while remaining honest and transparent.

Why Preparation for Forensic Evaluations Matters

Many parents enter forensic evaluations unsure of what to expect. Without proper preparation, they may unintentionally misrepresent themselves, struggle to articulate their parenting strengths, or become defensive in response to difficult questions. Our firm helps clients:

• Understand the Process – We explain the structure of forensic evaluations, including the types of questions evaluators ask and what to expect during interviews and home visits.

• Refine Communication Skills – Clients learn how to express their parenting strengths clearly and respond effectively to evaluator inquiries.

• Avoid Common Pitfalls – We identify behaviors and statements that could negatively impact the evaluation outcome.

• Practice with Mock Evaluations – Simulating the evaluation experience helps clients build confidence and prepare for various scenarios.

The Benefits of Professional Consultation Before a Forensic Evaluation

1. Enhanced Understanding of the Evaluator’s Role

A forensic evaluator’s primary goal is to determine what custody arrangement is in the child's best interests. Our legal team helps clients align their approach with this standard while emphasizing the importance of honesty and transparency.

2. Building a Child-Centered Narrative

Courts favor parents who prioritize their child’s needs above personal disputes. We guide clients on how to highlight their parenting strengths while demonstrating cooperation with the other parent when appropriate.

3. Strengthening Case Strategy

Preparation can make a significant difference in how evaluators perceive a parent’s ability to provide a stable, nurturing environment. We analyze case history, past legal filings, and co-parenting patterns to help clients present their case effectively.

4. Avoiding Red Flags

Certain behaviors, such as badmouthing the other parent, being evasive, or showing signs of parental alienation, can negatively impact the evaluation. Our firm helps clients recognize these issues before their interview.

Take Control of Your Custody Case

If you are facing a forensic custody evaluation, don’t go into it unprepared. With our expert legal consulting services, you can approach the evaluation process with the knowledge and confidence needed to present your parenting abilities effectively.

📞 Call the Law Offices of Mindin & Mindin, P.C. today at 888.501.3292 to schedule a consultation and learn how we can assist you in preparing for your forensic evaluation. The right preparation can make a critical difference in securing the best outcome for your child’s future.

Bianca Censori v Kanye West: What We Can Learn About High-Profile Divorce

Holler, we want prenup! We want prenup!

Rumors are swirling about the potential divorce of rapper Kanye West and model/architect Bianca Censori less than two weeks after their headline-grabbing appearance at the 2025 Grammy Awards. Reports from TMZ and The Daily Mail claim that the couple has split and that "both sides have reached out to divorce attorneys."

If true, this would mark another high-profile divorce for West, who finalized his divorce from Kim Kardashian in 2022 before quickly moving on to Censori. While the details of their potential divorce settlement remain unclear, this situation brings up important legal considerations for celebrity divorces—and for high-net-worth individuals in general.

I will preface this post with a statement that I WAS once a fan of Kanye West but as a Jewish attorney, I find his conduct to be disgusting, hateful and promoting violence against peaceful people, and I don’t support his new music, projects, branding or anything he endorses.

Legal Issues in High-Profile Celebrity Divorces

Whether it's Kanye West and Bianca Censori, Kim Kardashian and Kanye West, or Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, celebrity divorces are often messy, expensive, and highly publicized. However, legal lessons can be applied to any divorce—whether you're a high-net-worth individual or simply looking to protect your future.

Reports suggest that Kanye and Bianca had a wedding ceremony but never obtained a marriage certificate. If this is true, their split may not require a legal divorce at all—because under U.S. law, a marriage must be legally recognized to require divorce proceedings.

Bianca may not be entitled to spousal support or asset division under marital laws if their union was not legally binding. Instead, any financial disputes may fall under contract law, depending on agreements made between the parties.

Always ensure that your marriage is legally recognized—and consider a prenuptial agreement to protect your assets in case of divorce.

Prenuptial & Postnuptial Agreements in High-Net-Worth Marriages

West's previous divorce settlement with Kim Kardashian reportedly included a prenuptial agreement, which likely simplified asset division. Given West’s $400+ million net worth, he may have used a similar approach with Censori—if they were legally married at all.

A prenuptial agreement (prenup) allows a couple to:

✅ Define asset division before marriage.
✅ Protect business interests (like West’s Yeezy brand).
✅ Clarify spousal support agreements in case of divorce.

Without a prenup, dividing assets becomes much more complicated, particularly for public figures whose income fluctuates.

Even if you’re not a celebrity, a prenup or postnuptial agreement can help protect your financial future in marriage.

The Impact of Public Image on Divorce Settlements

Kanye West’s recent controversies, including his antisemitic comments and erratic public behavior, may have influenced the reported breakdown of his relationship with Censori.

In divorce cases, a spouse’s behavior—especially in high-profile situations—can affect:

🔹 Custody decisions (if children are involved).
🔹 Reputation and future career opportunities.
🔹 Spousal support negotiations, if one spouse argues that the other’s behavior led to financial or emotional harm.

While Kanye and Bianca don’t have children together, his public controversies could still impact financial negotiations if they are legally married.

Your public image and personal behavior can have long-term legal and financial consequences in divorce cases.

What Happens Next?

As of now, the Kanye West and Bianca Censori divorce rumors remain unconfirmed, but if their marriage was legal, it’s possible that:

🔹 Divorce attorneys will negotiate a private settlement.
🔹 Censori could receive financial compensation, depending on what was agreed upon.
🔹 Legal disputes may arise over shared assets (if any exist).

While most people don’t have to deal with celebrity-level divorces, navigating a separation can be just as complex for anyone involved in a marriage—especially when money, assets, and reputation are at stake.

Going Through a Divorce? Get Expert Legal Guidance

At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we specialize in New York divorce cases, including:

✅ High-net-worth divorces
✅ Prenuptial & postnuptial agreements
✅ Spousal support & asset division
✅ Child custody & support disputes

📞 Click to Call us today at 888-501-3292 for a confidential consultation. Whether you’re a business owner, a professional, or anyone seeking clarity on their rights in a divorce, we’re here to protect your future and guide you through the process.

Why New York Courts Uphold Separation Agreements: A Breakdown of Elliott v. Elliott (2025)

When couples decide to divorce, a separation agreement can be an essential tool to streamline the process. However, disputes sometimes arise when one party later seeks to set aside the agreement, claiming unfairness, lack of financial disclosure, or lack of representation. The recent Elliott v. Elliott decision from the New York Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reinforces the legal principles that protect validly executed separation agreements and highlights the high bar required to overturn them.

We will analyze the key legal takeaways from this case and what they mean for individuals navigating divorce in New York State.

Can a Separation Agreement Be Overturned for Lack of Financial Disclosure?

One of the plaintiff's main arguments was that the separation agreement should be rescinded because the defendant failed to provide full financial disclosure before signing. However, the court rejected this argument, explaining that financial disclosure is only required in matrimonial actions when issues of spousal support or maintenance are raised (Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (4)).

Since the plaintiff waived her right to maintenance in the separation agreement and acknowledged she was self-supporting, she could not later argue that the agreement was invalid due to missing financial disclosures.

Key Takeaway:

• New York law does not require full financial disclosure before signing if a separation agreement does not involve spousal support.

• Waiving maintenance rights in a divorce agreement limits the ability to later challenge it on the grounds of missing financial information.

Unrepresented Parties & Court’s Role in Informing Them of Their Rights

Another argument raised by the plaintiff was that she was unrepresented by an attorney and was not given the legally required maintenance guidelines notice under Domestic Relations Law § 236 (B) (6) (g).

However, the court found that this claim was directly contradicted by the record. The divorce complaint explicitly acknowledged that she had received notice of the guideline maintenance calculation, and the court's findings confirmed that she was informed of her rights before finalizing the agreement.

Key Takeaway:

• While legal representation is always advisable, not having a lawyer does not automatically invalidate a separation agreement.

• Courts will carefully review the record to determine whether an unrepresented party was properly informed of their rights.

Challenging a Separation Agreement for Unfairness & Overreaching

The plaintiff also argued that the agreement was unfair, making it unenforceable. However, New York courts strongly favor upholding marital settlement agreements unless there is clear evidence of fraud, overreaching, duress, or unconscionability.

To successfully challenge a separation agreement, the party must show that:

1. The agreement was grossly unfair on its face.

2. The unfairness resulted from coercion, deception, or abuse of power by the other spouse.

In this case, the court found:

• The agreement was not unfair on its face—even though the plaintiff may have given up more than she was legally required to, the agreement did not "shock the conscience."

• The plaintiff had ample opportunity to review the agreement, as shown by a handwritten amendment she requested, proving she had input before signing.

• The plaintiff’s education level was not enough to prove she was unable to understand the agreement.

Key Takeaway:

• Courts rarely overturn separation agreements just because one party later regrets their decision.

• A clear record of voluntary participation and modifications made at a party's request will support an agreement's enforceability.

The Role of Financial Disclosure in Challenging an Agreement

The plaintiff also claimed that the agreement should be set aside because she did not have all the material financial facts when signing.

However, the court clarified that mere nondisclosure of financial details is not enough to invalidate an agreement unless it results in an inequitable or unfair division of assets.

Even if the plaintiff was unaware of the exact value of the defendant’s retirement account, this did not render the agreement unfair because:

• She knowingly waived any claim to maintenance or additional financial support.

• Courts evaluate the total fairness of the agreement, not just one financial aspect.

Key Takeaway:

• Full financial disclosure is not required for a valid agreement, unless spousal support is at issue.

• An agreement will not be overturned simply because one spouse later believes they could have negotiated for more.

Property Rights & Possession of the Marital Home

Finally, the plaintiff claimed the agreement was unconscionable because it relinquished her possessory rights in the marital residence.

The court rejected this argument, noting the agreement did not grant the defendant exclusive possession of the home, the plaintiff retained access rights to the property with notice, the agreement allowed her continued use of the barn on the property, if a dispute over the sale of the home arose, she could file a partition action to force its sale.

Because these terms were reasonable and did not place the plaintiff at a severe disadvantage, the court upheld the agreement.

Key Takeaway:

• Courts will not overturn a separation agreement just because one party no longer finds it favorable.

• Property agreements that allow reasonable access and rights are not unconscionable.

What This Case Means for Divorce & Separation Agreements in New York

The decision in Elliott v. Elliott reaffirms New York’s strong legal precedent favoring the enforcement of voluntary separation agreements. Courts are reluctant to intervene unless there is clear proof of fraud, duress, or gross unfairness.

Lessons from This Case:

✅ Financial disclosure is only required if spousal support is at issue.
✅ Not having an attorney does not automatically invalidate an agreement.
✅ Courts uphold agreements unless they "shock the conscience".
✅ A party's regret or later dissatisfaction is not grounds for rescission.

If you are considering signing a separation agreement or divorce settlement, it is critical to have an experienced attorney review the terms. At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we ensure that your rights are fully protected and that you are entering into a fair and enforceable agreement.

If you need assistance with a divorce, separation agreement, or post-divorce modifications, our team at Mindin & Mindin, P.C. is here to help.

📞 Call us at 888-501-3292 for a free consultation today!

Why You Should Have an Attorney Review Your Prenuptial Agreement

When planning for marriage, a prenuptial agreement can be one of the most important legal documents you sign. While New York law does not require each party to have an attorney, failing to have an experienced prenuptial agreement attorney review the contract can lead to unintended consequences, unenforceable terms, or financial pitfalls in the event of a divorce. At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we have reviewed and drafted nearly 1,000 prenuptial agreements, ensuring our clients enter their marriages with clarity and protection.

While some online services claim that prenups can be completed without legal counsel, having an attorney review the agreement before signing offers significant advantages, including:

✅ Ensuring the Agreement Is Enforceable

A poorly drafted prenuptial agreement (yes, I’m talking to you LegalZoom) may not hold up in court. In New York, prenuptial agreements must meet specific legal requirements to be enforceable, including full financial disclosure, voluntary execution, and fairness at the time of signing. If a prenup is challenged later, a judge can invalidate specific parts or the entire agreement if it appears unfair, rushed, or improperly executed.

✅ Avoiding Hidden Pitfalls and Unfair Terms

Without legal guidance, you may not fully understand the financial implications of the contract. An attorney can identify:

• Unfair provisions that could leave one party at a significant disadvantage

• Terms that conflict with New York marital law, making them unenforceable

• Ambiguous language that could lead to disputes in the future

✅ Protecting Your Financial Future

Prenuptial agreements cover much more than just protecting assets. They can also address:

• Spousal support (alimony) waivers and their enforceability

• Debt protection, ensuring one spouse is not responsible for the other's liabilities

• Inheritance rights, securing assets for children from previous marriages

• Business ownership, protecting companies and professional practices

✅ Preventing Claims of Coercion or Duress

One of the most common challenges to a prenup is claiming that it was signed under pressure. An attorney ensures that:

• Both parties sign voluntarily and with full understanding of the terms

• There is no last-minute signing right before the wedding without having the terms thoroughly reviewed and understood by one of the parties (which courts may view as coercion)

• Proper financial disclosure is made, preventing future claims of fraud

Can You Waive the Right to an Attorney?

Yes, under New York law, you can waive the right to independent counsel when signing a prenuptial agreement. However, this is not recommended because:

• Courts scrutinize agreements where one party does not have legal representation

• A lack of legal counsel can create unfair advantages for one spouse

• If the agreement is later challenged, the absence of independent legal review can weaken its enforceability

When Should You Have an Attorney Review the Prenup?

It’s essential to have your prenuptial agreement reviewed well before your wedding. Waiting until the last minute can create issues of duress, potentially leading to the agreement being thrown out in court. We recommend:
✔ Reviewing the agreement at least one to six months before the wedding (although there is no hard and fast rule for the timing. The overall process is more important).
✔ Ensuring both parties fully disclose their finances
✔ Giving both parties adequate time to consult with their independent attorney

Flat-Fee Prenuptial Agreement Review & Drafting

At Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we provide:
✔ Flat-fee services for both drafting and reviewing prenuptial agreements
✔ Nearly 1,000 prenups reviewed and drafted, ensuring expert legal protection
✔ Comprehensive consultation to help you understand your rights and obligations
✔ Representation by one of New York City’s top-ranked and well-known matrimonial attorneys

Secure Your Future with a Properly Drafted Prenup

A prenuptial agreement is one of the most important legal documents you will ever sign. Make sure yours is ironclad, fair, and enforceable. Contact Mindin & Mindin, P.C. today for a consultation.

📞 Call or text us at 888-501-3292

📍 Serving clients across All of New York State, New York City, including Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, The Bronx, and Staten Island, Westchester and Orange Counties, Nassau and Suffolk Counties.

When an Email Becomes a Child Support Waiver: A Rare Exception in New York Law

Child support obligations in New York are typically strictly enforced and cannot be modified informally. Courts require formal modifications through Family Court orders or legally binding agreements executed with the required formalities. However, in the recent case of Hanford v. Hanford, the Second Department carved out an exception to this general rule, finding that a series of emails between ex-spouses was sufficient to constitute a valid waiver of child support—despite lacking the formal legal requirements for modification.

This decision is highly unusual and narrowly tailored to specific circumstances. In this post, we’ll break down this case, what made it different, and why you should never rely on informal agreements when modifying child support.

The General Rule: Child Support Can Only Be Modified by Court Order or Formal Agreement

Under New York law, child support orders are binding and enforceable. If parents wish to modify a child support obligation, they typically must:

• Obtain a court order modifying support based on a substantial change in circumstances.

• Execute a formal written modification agreement that complies with contractual requirements, such as being acknowledged and signed in the presence of a notary.

• Ensure that any modification protects the child’s best interests, as courts will not enforce agreements that unfairly deprive a child of financial support.

However, in Hanford v. Hanford, the court found an unusual exception to this well-established rule.

What Happened in Hanford v. Hanford?

1. The parties divorced in 2016 and included a separation agreement that required the father to pay child support to the mother. The agreement was incorporated but not merged into their divorce judgment, meaning it remained a separate and enforceable contract. The agreement also explicitly stated that any modifications must be executed with the same formality as the original agreement, meaning they had to be notarized and in writing.

2. The Email Agreement to Reduce Child Support: In April 2017, the parties exchanged emails and agreed to reduce the father’s child support obligation. For the next five years, the father paid the reduced amount, and the mother accepted the payments without objection.

3. In 2022, the mother filed a violation petition, claiming that the father owed $93,612.45 in unpaid child support and medical expenses. The Support Magistrate ruled (what would ordinarily be correct) in her favor, ordering the father to pay the full arrears based on the original 2016 agreement. Case closed, right?

4. The Father’s Appeal: Was There a Waiver? The father appealed, arguing that their email agreement and five years of performance constituted a valid waiver of her right to enforce the higher child support amount. The Family Court initially denied his objections, but the Appellate Division reversed, ruling in favor of the father.

Why Did the Court Allow This Exception?

The key distinction in this case was the difference between a modification and a waiver:

• Modification Agreement: A binding agreement that changes the child support terms and must meet all contractual requirements (such as notarization).

• Waiver: A voluntary and intentional relinquishment of a known right that does not require the same formalities as a modification.

Key Factors That Led to the Court’s Decision:

✔ The Mother Explicitly Agreed to the Reduction – She acknowledged in court that she agreed to the reduced payments in 2017.

✔ She Accepted Reduced Payments for Five Years – The mother never objected or attempted to collect arrears until 2022, reinforcing that she voluntarily abandoned her right to full child support during the period.

✔ Waivers Are Enforceable if Executed – Unlike a modification, a waiver cannot be undone retroactively once the parties have followed through with it. The mother could only withdraw her waiver moving forward, not retroactively demand arrears for the past five years.

✔ Waiver of a Contractual Provision is Possible – Even though the agreement required formal modifications, the court ruled that the mother’s conduct effectively waived that requirement for past payments.

The decision in Hanford v. Hanford is highly unusual and should not be relied upon as a common strategy for modifying child support. Most cases will still follow the general rule that informal agreements are not enforceable.

🚨 Never rely on verbal or email agreements to modify child support – Courts typically do not recognize informal modifications unless they meet strict legal requirements.

📜 Always execute a legally binding modification agreement – If you and your co-parent agree to change child support, put it in writing, sign it, and have it notarized. Then, get court approval to ensure enforceability.

⚖️ A waiver must be intentional and consistent – This case was unique because the mother explicitly agreed to the reduction and accepted the lower amount for five years without seeking back payments.

📅 Waivers apply to past payments, not future ones – Even in this rare case, the mother was only barred from collecting arrears for the years she accepted reduced payments. She was free to restore full child support moving forward.

---

The Hanford v. Hanford decision is a rare example of how contract law principles—specifically, waiver—can impact child support enforcement. While this case was resolved in favor of the father, it is not the norm and should not be seen as a loophole to avoid child support obligations.

If you believe your child support order needs to be modified, the best course of action is to work with an experienced family law attorney to ensure the modification is legally valid and enforceable.

At Law Offices of Mindin & Mindin, P.C., we help parents with child support modifications, enforcement, and violations to ensure their rights—and their children’s best interests—are protected.

📞 Call us today at 888-501-3292 for a free consultation to discuss your child support case.

Original Decision Below:
The parties, who have one child together, divorced in 2016. In their separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into the judgment of divorce, the parties agreed that the father would pay the mother child support. The separation agreement also provided that neither the separation agreement nor any provisions thereof could be modified or waived except by a writing “duly subscribed and acknowledged with the same formality as” the separation agreement itself. The mother does not dispute that in April 2017, the parties reached an agreement by email to reduce the amount of child support. From April 2017 until September 2022, the father paid the mother child support at the reduced amount agreed upon by the parties.
In 2022, the mother filed a violation petition. After a hearing, the Support Magistrate, in an order dated February 20, 2024, and an order of disposition also dated February 20, 2024, found that the father violated the child support provisions of the separation agreement and directed the father to pay child support arrears in the sum of $93,612.45, which consisted of basic child support arrears in the sum of $93,486.29 and unreimbursed health expenses in the sum of $126.16. The father filed objections to the Support Magistrate's order and order of disposition. In an order dated April 12, 2024, the Family Court denied the father's objections. The father appeals.

There is a distinction between a modification agreement and a waiver. A modification agreement, because it is an agreement based upon consideration, is binding according to its terms and may only be withdrawn by agreement. A waiver, on the other hand, does not require consideration. Rather, a waiver requires no more than the voluntary and intentional abandonment of a known right which, but for the waiver, would have been enforceable. A waiver, to the extent that it has been executed, cannot be expunged or recalled, but, not being a binding agreement, can, to the extent that it is executory, be withdrawn. A waiver may arise by either an express agreement or by such conduct or failure to act as to evince an intent not to claim the purported advantage.
An agreement which does not satisfy the prerequisites of a legally binding modification agreement may nonetheless constitute a valid waiver, which cannot be withdrawn once the parties have performed in accordance with its terms. Further, a contractual provision which sets forth requirements for a legally enforceable waiver may itself be waives.
Here, the mother's testimony that she agreed to the reduced amount of child support, coupled with the mother's acceptance of the reduced payments for five years, demonstrates that she intentionally abandoned the right she possessed to receive child support at the rate set forth in the separation agreement for the years preceding her violation petition. Contrary to the Support Magistrate's determination, the mother's express waiver of her future child support payments was valid and enforceable until the mother validly withdrew it by filing the violation petition.

Hanford v. Hanford, – NYS3d – , 2025 WL 322964 (2nd Dep’t.  2025)

Court-Ordered Sales of Marital Homes in New York: A Shifting Legal Landscape

For many divorcing couples in New York, the family home is their most valuable asset, and the decision of whether to sell or retain it is a significant factor in settlement negotiations. Historically, courts in New York have been unable to order the sale of a marital residence while a divorce is still pending. However, recent case law suggests that this long-standing rule is changing, allowing courts to direct the sale of a marital home in certain situations.

If you’re currently going through a divorce in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, or Staten Island, and facing challenges over the fate of your marital home, understanding these legal shifts is crucial.

Can a New York Court Order the Sale of a Marital Home Before a Divorce Is Finalized?

The traditional rule, as set forth in Kahn v. Kahn (1977), was clear: New York courts could not force the sale of a marital residence while the divorce was still pending unless both parties agreed. The reasoning was that because New York used to require a finding of "fault" before granting a divorce, courts did not have the authority to distribute marital assets, including ordering the sale of a home, unless a final divorce decree had been issued.

New York adopted “No-Fault Divorce” in 2010 (DRL Sec. 170(7)) and this changed the landscape. Today, once one party states under oath that the marriage has irretrievably broken down for at least six months, a divorce is inevitable. Courts no longer decide whether a couple can divorce—only how to divide their assets.

This change has prompted courts to reconsider whether they should be able to order the sale of a marital home during the divorce process when fairness requires it.

Recent Cases Allowing the Sale of the Marital Home During Divorce

D.R.D. v. J.D.D. (2021): The First Major Shift

In this Monroe County case, the husband and wife had agreed to sell the marital home but could not agree on how to proceed. The wife, who was living in the home, refused to allow the husband to make repairs necessary for the sale and later attempted to delay the closing indefinitely. The court found that she was using the home as an interest-free loan by living there without contributing to mortgage costs while blocking her husband from accessing his share of the equity.

The judge ruled that the home should be sold immediately, stating that the legal landscape had changed since Kahn v. Kahn and that the principles of equitable distribution allowed courts to intervene in property matters before a divorce was finalized.

Taglioni v. Garcia (2021): When a Spouse Uses the Home as Leverage

This First Department case involved a Manhattan townhouse worth $6 million. One spouse wanted to sell the home, while the other refused unless the selling spouse paid for a rental apartment in New York City during the divorce.

While the appellate court ultimately reversed the trial judge’s order to sell the property, two dissenting judges argued that courts should have the authority to force a sale when one party is using the home to gain leverage in divorce negotiations. This dissenting opinion laid the groundwork for future courts to expand their authority.

J.H. v. C.H. (2024): Foreclosure and Financial Harm Justify a Forced Sale

In this recent Putnam County case, the husband continued living in the marital home after separation but defaulted on the mortgage twice, triggering foreclosure proceedings. He then proposed a 40-year loan modification that would have obligated his wife to a mortgage she could not afford.

The court ruled that allowing him to stay in the home indefinitely would be unfair and ordered that the home be sold immediately. The judge specifically cited the reasoning in D.R.D. v. J.D.D., further establishing a trend toward court-ordered home sales in certain divorces.

When Can a Court Order the Sale of a Marital Home?

While these cases do not create a blanket rule, they signal that New York courts are becoming more willing to order the sale of a home before a divorce is finalized. Some key factors that courts consider include:

✅ Financial Harm to One Party – If one spouse is unfairly burdened by mortgage payments, unable to access their share of home equity, or facing foreclosure, courts may step in.

✅ Bad Faith Delays – If one spouse is using the home as leverage to extract concessions, such as demanding rent payments in exchange for agreeing to sell, a judge may intervene.

✅ No-Fault Divorce Principles – Since divorces in New York are now guaranteed once one party files, courts have less reason to delay property division.

✅ Children’s Housing Needs – Courts may be reluctant to order a sale if children would be left without a stable home. However, if the home is a financial liability, a sale may still be ordered.

What This Means for Divorcing Couples in New York

If you are divorcing and your spouse is refusing to sell the home or delaying the sale to gain leverage, courts may be able to intervene. These legal changes mean that judges are no longer strictly bound by Kahn v. Kahn and may now order a home sale when fairness requires it.

This shift could be particularly important in today’s high mortgage rate environment, where holding onto a home at an outdated low rate could be financially harmful to one party while benefiting the other.

How Mindin & Mindin, P.C. Can Help

Dividing a marital home during a divorce can be one of the most contentious and complex financial decisions. Our experienced New York divorce attorneys at Mindin & Mindin, P.C. can help you:

✔ Negotiate a fair settlement to avoid unnecessary delays.
✔ Petition the court to order a home sale if your spouse is using the house as leverage.
✔ Ensure that financial arrangements are in your best interest, including mortgage obligations and equity division.
✔ Protect your rights if foreclosure is a concern.

If you’re struggling with a home sale dispute during your divorce, call us today at 888.501.3292 for a confidential consultation.

Don’t let your spouse hold your financial future hostage—take control of your divorce today.

How High Mortgage Rates Are Changing Divorce Dynamics in New York City: What You Need to Know in 2025

The first Monday after New Year’s, often called Divorce Monday, typically marks a spike in divorce filings as couples make resolutions to start fresh. However, in 2025, rising mortgage rates are reshaping how couples approach separation, especially for those who own homes in New York City. With high interest rates and skyrocketing living costs across Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and Staten Island, splitting up is not just emotionally challenging—it’s financially daunting.

At Mindin & Mindin, PC, we’ve seen how these economic pressures uniquely impact divorcing couples. Let’s explore what these trends mean for New Yorkers considering divorce this year.

The Mortgage Conundrum: Keeping or Selling the Home

Why Mortgage Rates Matter Many homeowners locked in low-interest rates during the pandemic, often below 4%. With current rates around 7%, refinancing or purchasing a new home now means facing significantly higher monthly payments. For example:

• A $400,000 mortgage at 2.7% costs about $1,600 per month.

• The same mortgage at 7% jumps to $2,660 per month.

This financial disparity poses tough decisions for divorcing couples:

• Keeping the Home: If one spouse wants to stay in the home, refinancing is typically required to remove the other spouse from the mortgage. However, the higher payments on a refinanced loan may not be feasible for a single income.

• Selling the Home: Selling offers a clean break and the chance to split equity, but buying or renting a new place in New York City’s expensive market presents its own challenges.

Rising Costs and Limited Options

The Impact on Divorce Decisions The financial strain of maintaining or replacing a home is pushing some couples to delay or reconsider divorce. Even those who choose to separate face the reality of higher costs for both renting and buying:

• Apartment Rents: Lease rates in New York City have surged by over 20% in the past four years.

• New Mortgages: Divorced individuals looking to buy will face the same high-interest rates, further limiting their housing options.

For many, the fear of financial instability is becoming a barrier to leaving an unhappy marriage.

Economic Factors Driving Divorce Trends

1. Increased Divorces in Low-Income Families
   While mortgage rates may deter wealthier couples from divorcing, economic pressures like job loss or low wages are prompting more separations among low-income families. Rising living costs, coupled with financial stress, can strain relationships to a breaking point.

2. 50-50 Custody Trends
   Financial struggles often influence custody decisions. Unemployed or underemployed parents may seek 50-50 custody to reduce child support obligations, reshaping traditional parenting arrangements.

3. Strong Economic Conditions
   For those in stable financial situations, rising incomes and job security may provide the resources needed to separate and maintain two households.

What Should Divorcing Couples Consider?

If you’re contemplating divorce in 2025, mainly as a homeowner in New York City, it’s essential to weigh your options carefully:

1. Consult Financial Experts
   A Certified Divorce Financial Analyst (CDFA) can help evaluate your housing options, from refinancing to selling, and create a sustainable post-divorce budget.

2. Evaluate Housing Costs
   Decide whether staying in your home is financially viable, especially if refinancing leads to significantly higher payments.

3. Plan for Custody and Support
   Consider how financial realities may impact custody arrangements and child support obligations.

4. Work with Experienced Attorneys
   Navigating complex financial and legal issues requires skilled representation. At Mindin & Mindin, PC, we guide clients through these challenges to secure fair and sustainable outcomes.

Moving Forward: A Call to Action

Divorce is a significant life change that requires thoughtful planning, particularly in today’s economic climate. If you’re considering divorce and need guidance on how high mortgage rates or other financial factors might impact your situation, our experienced team at Mindin & Mindin, PC is here to help.

Contact us at 888.501.3292 to schedule a consultation. Together, we’ll help you make informed decisions and start the next chapter of your life with confidence.

In 2025, financial considerations like mortgage rates influence how many couples approach divorce, especially in New York City. While the path may feel more complicated, the right legal and financial support can help you achieve clarity and a fresh start. Remember, you don’t have to face these challenges alone—reach out to Mindin & Mindin, PC for expert guidance tailored to your unique circumstances.