- 10 -
With regard to the third check, No. 1963, payable to the law
firm of Sotiras & Mannix, the memo line of this check reads:
“retainer.” This check was drafted and deposited only 2 weeks
after Ms. Zakrzewski initiated postdecree proceedings against
petitioner. We believe, given that petitioner was obligated,
pursuant to the operative settlement agreement, to make a cash
payment of $30,000 to Ms. Zakrzewski no later than December 31,
2001, and that he made a payment of only $13,579.91 to Ms.
Zakrzewski 2 weeks after that deadline, that this check
represents his personal outlay to retain counsel in defense of
Ms. Zakrzewski’s subsequent suit against him. There is nothing
in the record to suggest that this amount was ever sent to Ms.
Zakrzewski, let alone for her support. There is nothing in the
record, or, moreover the law, that allows us to entertain the
possibility that the cash paid by petitioners in their retention
of legal counsel might be construed as an alimony payment to Ms.
Zakrzewski.
Accordingly, and based on the foregoing facts and
discussion, we hold that the disputed payments made by
petitioners in 2002 were not alimony pursuant to section 71.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Last modified: November 10, 2007