In May 2014, MC and his former wife, C, executed a separation agreement which provided that their former marital home could not be sold for less than $700,000. However, after the property was sold to C's family member, for $360,000, MC claimed that he was misled about the contents of the sale documents and that the sale violated the separation agreement, which included a no-oral-modification clause.
In response to a lawsuit filed with the Kings County Supreme Court to void the sale and the deed, the judge assigned to the matter granted MC's pre-trial request – via motion for summary judgment -- to declare the deed null and void, and denied the defendants’ cross-motion to dismiss the complaint and validate the deed.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, upheld the lower court’s ruling, noting that the separation agreement's no-oral-modification clause was binding, and that any alleged oral agreement was neither in writing nor supported by consideration. Consequently, the AD2 affirmed the order with costs and remitted the matter to the Supreme Court for the entry of a judgment declaring the deed null and void.
The courts clearly did a good deed there.
# # #
DECISION