Braha v. Braha

• Decision Date: 14 October 2014
• Docket Number: No. 53005/2013.,53005/2013.
• Court: New York Supreme Court
• Parties: Ezra BRAHA, Plaintiff, v. Rina BRAHA, Defendant.

3 N.Y.S.3d 284 (Table)

Ezra BRAHA, Plaintiff
v.
Rina BRAHA, Defendant.

No. 53005/2013.

Supreme Court, Kings County, New York.

Oct. 14, 2014.

Brian D. Perskin, Esq., Brian D. Perskin & Assoc. P.C., New York, for Plaintiff.

Laurie Mermelstein, Esq., Seidemann & Mermelstein, Brooklyn, for Defendant.

Sharyn M. Duncan, Esq., Brooklyn, for the Children.

Opinion

JEFFREY S. SUNSHINE, J.

Upon the foregoing papers, motion sequences number 1 and 3 are consolidated for disposition. Defendant Rina Braha moves for an order declaring the Prenuptial Agreement entered into by the parties to be and void.¹

Facts and Procedural Background

The parties' Prenuptial Agreement was executed on December 5, 2002. They were married on December 12, 2002 and have two children, a daughter who is ten (10) years old and a who is seven (7) years old. In addition, defendant has two children from her first marriage, now 12 and 14 years old; plaintiff was also previously married and has one daughter from that marriage who is now 14. Defendant's four children currently reside with her. Plaintiff commenced the instant action on July 25, 2013.

Defendant's Contentions

In support of her position, defendant argues that she met plaintiff when she was 22 years old and he was 33. At that time, she was a divorced mother with two children, one 18 months old and the other three months old. She claims that she had no skills, was earning no money and was supporting herself and the children on the $1,300 per month in child support and $700 per month in maintenance that she was receiving from her former husband.

Defendant goes on to assert that the parties had a “whirlwind engagement of less than three weeks” and at the end of November, plaintiff informed her that they were getting married on December 12, 2002 because he had booked a honeymoon cruise for December 22, 2002. Less than two weeks before the marriage, plaintiff told defendant that he was receiving an immense amount of pressure from his father, who threatened to “cut him off” if they did not enter into a Prenuptial Agreement. Defendant goes on to claim that plaintiff told her that he did not need the agreement, but he wanted to satisfy his father. Defendant thus concludes that plaintiff fraudulently induced her to sign the Agreement, because before she signed it, plaintiff lead her to believe that he would never seek to enforce it, explaining that it was being executed as a “show” for his father.

More specifically, defendant alleges that plaintiff devised a plan where his attorney would draft the agreement and another attorney who previously represented her in a prior divorce would represent her; plaintiff's father would review the agreement; and all of the copies would be ripped up and thrown into the ocean on the parties' honeymoon cruise. Accordingly, defendant asserts that she did not pay any attention to or negotiate the terms of the agreement, since she believed that plaintiff would not enforce it and that it would be void. Defendant goes on to assert that she never would have agreed to sign the Prenuptial Agreement and limit her spousal maintenance.² Defendant further alleges that while they were on the cruise, both parties tore up their copies of the Prenuptial Agreement and threw the pieces into the ocean. Defendant thereafter believed that the Prenuptial Agreement no longer existed “until [plaintiff] in one of his fits of rage, dumped a copy on [the] table.”

Defendant also alleges that plaintiff mislead her when he told her that his only asset was a 25% interest in Mermaid International Inc., when he was a 25% owner of Braha Management, Inc., which defendant characterizes as a multi-million dollar family business that owns properties along Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn and hotels and malls in New Jersey.Defendant further supports her application with an affirmation from her former attorney in which he corroborates her story, alleging that he did not negotiate the terms of the Agreement, since both plaintiff and defendant made it clear to him that the Agreement would be torn up and thrown into the ocean on their honeymoon. He also alleges that it was obvious from the conversation between the parties that the marriage would not take place if the Prenuptial Agreement was not signed.

Plaintiff's Contentions

Plaintiff alleges that the Prenuptial Agreement was drafted, reviewed and agreed upon by both parties and their attorneys; he contends that is why he and defendant paid their lawyers to handle the matter. Plaintiff goes on to explain that he and defendant discussed how silly it was to go through this process, since they would most certainly remain married forever and the document would never be seen again. Plaintiff admits that they did make copies of the Prenuptial Agreement which they tossed away on their honeymoon. He goes on to state, however:

“Make no mistake, at no time did I ever intend to solely deceive my father and ify the binding legal document that had been executed between defendant and I. I am quite sure that I am not the first husband-to-be who insisted on a prenuptial agreement because of parental pressure. I am advised that does not make the document any less enforceable.

“Moreover, the scenario being set forth makes no sense inasmuch as it would involve scheming to perpetuate a fraud involving two attorneys.”

(Plaintiff's Affidavit, August 13, 2013, para 17–18).

Plaintiff thus concludes that although defendant now regrets signing the Prenuptial Agreement that she entered into knowingly, with the assistance of counsel, it is nonetheless binding and enforceable.

The Law

“In general, New York has a strong public...