Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In December 2006, Justice Laura Visitacion-Lewis of Supreme Court, New York County, held that a modification to a separation agreement was void ab initio and unenforceable. D.M. v. K.M., 14 Misc.3d 1206(A), Slip Copy, (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cty. 12/12/06). That case involved a woman who agreed to give up her rights under the original agreement according to which she would have received a large monthly maintenance payment, child support and custody of the couples' children. Although the Special Referee who first analyzed the case considered the modified agreement unenforceable because the ex-wife, an alcoholic, might have been impaired at the signing, the appellate court rescinded the agreement on another basis: The amended agreement was a product of the ex-husband's overreaching.
We are reminded by the holding in D.M. v. K.M. that there is a strict surveillance of all transactions between married persons, especially separation agreements. The appearance of equity is so zealous in this respect that a separation agreement may be set aside on grounds that would be insufficient to vitiate an ordinary
contract. But when is a separation agreement so unfair that New York's courts will set it aside?
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.