Samina Khan, respondent, v. Farrukh Khan, appellant.

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

Samina Khan, respondent, v. Farrukh Khan, appellant.

2010–04851 (Index No. 201830/09)

Decided: January 17, 2012

PETER B. SKELOS, J.P. L. PRISCILLA HALL LEONARD B. AUSTIN ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ. John G. Bliss, White Plains, N.Y., for appellant. Sklar & Prusinowski, Hempstead, N.Y. (Amy Sklar of counsel), for respondent.

Argued—December 19, 2011

DECISION & ORDER

In an action for an annulment or divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Diamond, J.), entered April 14, 2010, which, upon a decision dated March 10, 2010, made after a nonjury trial, annulled the marriage.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly awarded the plaintiff an annulment on the ground of fraud, as its determination was warranted by the evidence adduced at trial (see Domestic Relations Law § 140[e];  Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 N.Y.2d 492, 499;  Kober v. Kober, 16 N.Y.2d 191).   The plaintiff demonstrated that her consent to the marriage was procured by material fraud that was of such a nature as to deceive an ordinarily prudent person (see Murray v. Murray, 271 A.D.2d 587;  Sabbagh v. Copti, 251 A.D.2d 149).   Furthermore, there was sufficient evidence at trial to prove that the plaintiff did not continue the marital relationship after discovery of the fraud (see Domestic Relations Law § 140[e];  see generally Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 499).

The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.

SKELOS, J.P., HALL, AUSTIN and MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Copied to clipboard