Ronson v. Ronson
| Decision Date | 12 July 1977 |
| Citation | 396 N.Y.S.2d 939,58 A.D.2d 987 |
| Parties | Mary RONSON, Respondent, v. Chris RONSON, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert B. Shaad, Watertown, for appellant.
Alderman, Alderman, Samuels & Schepp, Bernard Samuels, Syracuse, for respondent.
Before MOULE, J. P., and CARDAMONE, SIMONS, DILLON and GOLDMAN, JJ.
Defendant appeals from a judgment granting plaintiff summary judgment in her action to collect two $2,500 past-due payments under a support agreement which contains a nonmerger clause and which was incorporated into a subsequent divorce decree.
In response to plaintiff's motion, defendant asserts that he was induced to enter into the agreement in October, 1972 by plaintiff's fraudulent misrepresentations and failure of disclosure concerning the extent of her assets.
Although defendant realized gross earnings in excess of $138,000 in the year the agreement was executed, he claims that had he known that plaintiff held bank deposits which earned approximately $2,900 in annual interest income, he would not have agreed to pay her $26,200 annually as required by the agreement. Defendant avers that these deposits were discovered in 1974 during an examination of the joint income tax returns of the parties.
Defendant's papers in response to the motion fail to raise a genuine issue of fact requiring a trial (CPLR 3212, subd. (b); O'Meara Co. v. National Park Bank, 239 N.Y. 386, 395, 146 N.E. 636, 638). In order to vitiate the support agreement, he is required to show facts in evidentiary form. Conclusory assertions of fraud are insufficient (Koppers Co., Inc. v. Empire Bituminous Products, 35 A.D.2d 906, 907, 316 N.Y.S.2d 858, 859; see Blake v. Gardino, 35 A.D.2d 1022, 315 N.Y.S.2d 973, affd. 29 N.Y.2d 876, 328 N.Y.S.2d 442, 278 N.E.2d 649; Lee v. Graubard, 205 App.Div. 344, 199 N.Y.S. 563). The defendant's opposing papers fail to contain any reference to the circumstances surrounding the negotiation or execution of the support agreement. He offers no allegations as to the acts or statements of the plaintiff which constitute fraud. He merely relies upon his legal characterization of undisclosed facts and thus has failed to meet his burden. Absent a detailed statement of the circumstances constituting the wrong, the defendant may not rely on the assertion that he was fraudulently induced to execute the agreement, particularly where, as here, he was represented by counsel during a lengthy period...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gershon v. Back
...529 N.Y.S.2d 538 (same), appeal dismissed, 73 N.Y.2d 851, 534 N.E.2d 333, 537 N.Y.S.2d 495 (1988) ; see also Ronson v. Ronson , 58 App. Div. 2d 987, 988, 396 N.Y.S.2d 939 (1977) ("In order to vitiate the support agreement, [a party] is required to show facts in evidentiary form. Conclusory ......
-
Eckstein v. Eckstein
... ... Davidoff, 93 A.D.2d 805, 460 N.Y.S.2d 603; Ronson v. Ronson, 58 A.D.2d 987, 988, 396 ... N.Y.S.2d 939). The defendant urges that she was induced to enter into the agreement by fraud in that the ... ...
-
Martin v. Martin
...execution (Riemer v. Riemer, 31 A.D.2d 482, 299 N.Y.S.2d 318, affd. 31 N.Y.2d 881, 340 N.Y.S.2d 185, 292 N.E.2d 320; Ronson v. Ronson, 58 A.D.2d 987, 396 N.Y.S.2d 939; Stahl v. Stahl, 16 A.D.2d 467, 228 N.Y.S.2d 724; cf. Stern v. Stern, This agreement was the subject of extensive negotiatio......
-
Davidoff v. Davidoff
...Sheindlin v. Sheindlin, 88 A.D.2d 930, 931, 450 N.Y.S.2d 881; Russell v. Russell, 90 A.D.2d 516, 454 N.Y.S.2d 910; Ronson v. Ronson, 58 A.D.2d 987, 988, 396 N.Y.S.2d 939; cf. Picotte v. Picotte, 82 A.D.2d 983, 984, 440 N.Y.S.2d 959 app. dsmd. 55 N.Y.2d 748, mot. for lv. to app. dsmd. 55 N.Y......