Alec Jeffrey Megibow - Page 8

                                                - 8 -                                                   
            full and complete satisfaction of all claims of the defendant                               
            [Marilyn] in connection with equitable distribution.”  He also                              
            finds support in the New York court’s discussion of other                                   
            property transfers in proximity to its discussion of the $50,000                            
            payment.                                                                                    
                  Petitioner relies on ambiguity as his defense.  In his post-                          
            trial memorandum, petitioner states:                                                        
                        It has always been our position, and indeed our                                 
                  original planned strategy, that the nature of the                                     
                  $50,000 payment was not characterized in open court.                                  
                  The stipulation was therefore silent on that matter.                                  
                  The invitation by the divorce court to submit a more                                  
                  particularized document left open the issue of post                                   
                  spousal death liability therefor, to be addressed, if                                 
                  at all, by supplementation of the agreement then                                      
                  recorded.  This was never done.                                                       
            Apparently, petitioner believed that, if the $50,000 payment was                            
            not labeled “an equitable distribution”, he might have been able                            
            to avoid his obligation to make that payment if Marilyn died                                
            after they were divorced and before any payment was made.                                   
            Nevertheless, petitioner admits:  “[M]any might come to the                                 
            conclusion that the $50,000 payment was in the nature of                                    
            equitable distribution”.                                                                    
                        3.  Analysis                                                                    
                  The $50,000 payment was made pursuant to the settlement                               
            stipulation and, although incorporated into the judgment of                                 
            divorce, it cannot be characterized as an amount “awarded by the                            
            court” within the meaning of N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law sec. 236B(1)(a)                             
            (“maintenance”) or (b) (“distributive award”).  Cf. Kaplan v.                               




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011