WANSI v. WANSI (2023)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Danielle WANSI, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Emmanuel WANSI, Defendant–Respondent.

918 Decided: October 26, 2023

Webber, J.P., Moulton, González, Kennedy, JJ.

Arnold S. Kronick, White Plains, for appellant. Emmanuel Wansi, respondent pro se.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul L. Alpert, J.), entered on or about January 19, 2023, which denied plaintiff's motion to vacate a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) dated June 24, 2021, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to plaintiff's contention, applications and motions for the issuance of QDROs are not barred by the statute of limitations and the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts (22 NYCRR) § 202.48 is inapplicable because it was merely a mechanism to effectuate payment of defendant's share in plaintiff's retirement plan (see Kraus v. Kraus, 131 A.D.3d 94, 102–104, 14 N.Y.S.3d 55 [2d Dept. 2015]; Denaro v. Denaro, 84 A.D.3d 1148, 1149, 924 N.Y.S.2d 453 [2d Dept. 2011], lv dismissed 17 N.Y.3d 921, 934 N.Y.S.2d 370, 958 N.E.2d 549 [2011]).

We further find that plaintiff was properly noticed by the proposed QDRO and note that plaintiff does not argue that the proposed document conflicted with the terms of the divorce judgment or that she was prejudiced by it.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network