Herb Mauthner, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Dena Ray Mauthner, Defendant–Appellant. (2015)

_

Judgment of divorce, Supreme Court, New York County (Matthew F. Cooper, J.), entered January 24, 2013, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, distributing the E–Trade account and Fidelity retirement accounts based upon their values at the date of the commencement of the action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In distributing the parties' assets, Supreme Court properly determined that the E–Trade account and Fidelity retirement accounts should be valued as of the date of the commencement of this action (see Domestic Relations Law § 236[B] [4][b];  McSparron v. McSparron, 87 N.Y.2d 275, 287–288 [1995] ).   While passive assets are generally valued close to the date of trial, there are no strict rules mandating the use of particular valuation dates, and the court's determination is reasonable in the circumstances (see Greenwald v. Greenwald, 164 A.D.2d 706, 713 [1st Dept 1991], lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 855 [1991];  Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][5] ).   Defendant's income is higher than plaintiff's, she was awarded the entirety of her UBS brokerage account of more than $1.6 million, and she shared in the money given to the parties by plaintiff's parents.

_

CLERK