Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Jein SHYUE, respondent, v. Isen TARN, appellant.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant wife appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Yancey, J.), entered September 7, 2001, as, after a nonjury trial, determined that she was not entitled to equitable distribution.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, to equitably distribute the marital property.
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant wife equitable distribution on the grounds that the parties lived together for a short period of time and maintained separate bank accounts. While the parties were married for approximately 6 1/212 years before the commencement of this action, and only lived together for short, sporadic periods during that time, the duration of a marriage is only one of a number of factors that must be considered by the court in determining equitable distribution (see Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][5][d]; Mele v. Mele, 152 A.D.2d 685, 544 N.Y.S.2d 25). Moreover, the evidence established that the plaintiff husband withdrew funds from a joint mutual fund account in order to purchase real property in his own name and acquired a 401(k) retirement plan during the course of the marriage. Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court should have equitably distributed this property which constituted marital property (see Pauk v. Pauk, 232 A.D.2d 386, 389, 648 N.Y.S.2d 621; Harrell v. Harrell, 120 A.D.2d 565, 566, 502 N.Y.S.2d 57).
Accordingly, we remit this matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, to equitably distribute the marital property.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 12, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)