Rabbani v. Rabbani

Decision Date30 December 1991
Citation178 A.D.2d 637,578 N.Y.S.2d 213
PartiesKaren RABBANI, Appellant, v. Shahram RABBANI, Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Weinstein, Kaplan & Cohen, P.C., Great Neck (Alexander Mark Kaplan, of counsel), for appellant.

Squadron, Ellenoff, Plesent & Lehrer, New York City (Stanley Plesent and Camille Pucci, of counsel), for respondent.

Before THOMPSON, J.P., and BRACKEN, HARWOOD and COPERTINO, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In an action to set aside, on the grounds of duress and unconscionability, a separation agreement executed by the parties on March 19, 1987, which agreement was incorporated into the parties' bilateral Dominican Republic judgment of divorce issued on March 27, 1987, the plaintiff wife appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.), dated February 5, 1988, which directed that the trial be limited to the issue of duress in the execution of the agreement, and from a judgment of the same court, entered November 30, 1989, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the defendant is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501[a][1].

After 10 years of marriage, the parties, who were both represented by independent, competent counsel of their choice during negotiations, executed a separation agreement which settled, inter alia, all economic and property issues between the parties. Shortly after the signing of the agreement, the parties travelled together to the Dominican Republic, where they appeared in court for entry of a divorce judgment on mutual consent, which judgment directed the parties to comply with the terms of the separation agreement.

Subsequently, the wife commenced the instant action to set aside the separation agreement, on the grounds of duress and unconscionability. She did not challenge the validity of the judgment of divorce.

The New York courts will generally accord recognition to bilateral foreign judgments of divorce, including the terms and provisions of any agreements...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Cvitanovich-dubie v. Dubie
    • United States
    • Hawaii Court of Appeals
    • April 14, 2010
    ...Cliburn v. Cliburn, 48 So.2d 126 (Miss.1950); In Re Marriage of DeLeon, 804 S.W.2d 801 (Mo.Ct.App.E.D.1991); Rabbani v. Rabbani, 178 A.D.2d 637 (N.Y. 2 Dept.1991); Gonzalez v. Beraha, 449 F.Supp. 1011 (D.C.Canal Zone Hyde v. Hyde, 562 S.W.2d 194 (Tenn.1978). The [11/28/03 Decree] is not voi......
  • Cvitanovich-Dubie v. Dubie No. 28928 (Haw. App. 4/12/2010)
    • United States
    • Hawaii Court of Appeals
    • April 12, 2010
    ...Cliburn v. Cliburn, 48 So. 2d 126 (Miss. 1950); In Re Marriage of DeLeon, 804 S.W.2d 801 (Mo. Ct. App. E.D. 1991); Rabbani v. Rabbani, 178 A.D.2d 637 (N.Y. 2 Dept. 1991); Gonzalez v. Beraha, 449 F. Supp. 1011 (D.C. Canal Zone 1978); Hyde v. Hyde, 562 S.W.2d 194 (Tenn. 1978). The [11/28/03 D......
  • Boyne v. Boyne
    • United States
    • New York County Court
    • February 28, 2019
    ...compelling public policy (see Greschler v. Greschler , 51 N.Y.2d at 376—377, 434 N.Y.S.2d 194, 414 N.E.2d 694 ; Rabbani v. Rabbani , 178 A.D.2d 637, 638, 578 N.Y.S.2d 213 )." ( Badawi v. Wael Mounir Alesawy , 135 A.D.3d 792, 793, 24 N.Y.S.3d 683, 684 [Dept., 2016] ). "Public policy should n......
  • Tal v. Tal
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • February 8, 1993
    ...N.Y.2d 368, 434 N.Y.S.2d 194, 414 N.E.2d 694; Schoenbrod v. Siegler, 20 N.Y.2d 403, 283 N.Y.S.2d 881, 230 N.E.2d 638; Rabbani v. Rabbani, 178 A.D.2d 637, 578 N.Y.S.2d 213; see, generally, Restatement, Conflict of Laws 2d, Section 84, pp. 169-171. Absent some showing of fraud in the procurem......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT