236 A.D.3d 1082
N.Y. App. Div.2025Background
- Michael Torkin and Heather Susac married in 2001 and have two children; they began a collaborative divorce process in 2016 but ultimately litigated.
- On December 13, 2016, they signed agreements, including a "Stop-the-Clock Agreement" setting December 31, 2016, as the cutoff for marital property accrual.
- The plaintiff (Torkin) initiated divorce proceedings on December 13, 2017.
- After trial in Supreme Court, Westchester County, the court issued an amended judgment of divorce in December 2021.
- The court made rulings regarding distribution of Torkin's law firm partnership interests, division of assets, maintenance (spousal support), child support, and enforceability of the "Stop-the-Clock Agreement."
- Both parties appealed and cross-appealed aspects of the amended judgment, which the Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Valuation & Distribution of Partnership Interest | Sought smaller share for Susac (less than 37%) | Argued for significant share due to homemaker contributions | 37% awarded to Susac recognizing indirect contributions |
| Status of 2014 Trust | Argued trust was separate property | Claimed trust was marital property | Trust deemed marital; to be divided equally |
| Carrying Charges Credit | Sought credit for post-commencement home expenses | Opposed, citing interim support obligations | No credit; expenses offset by interim support obligations |
| Validity of "Stop-the-Clock Agreement" | Contended agreement bars further accrual, should be enforced | Sought to set aside as unfair without hearing | Agreement found fair and enforceable without hearing |
| Maintenance (Spousal Support) | Sought lower amount/duration, argued for credits | Sought substantial maintenance reflecting earning disparity | Maintenance award affirmed as within court discretion |
| Child Support & College Costs | Sought credit for college costs as offset to child support | Opposed credit, advocated for support award | No credit; child support calculated as directed |
| Separate Property: Simpson Thacher Interest | Sought confirmation as separate property | Contended for inclusion as marital property | Confirmed as Torkin's separate property |
Key Cases Cited
- Holterman v. Holterman, 3 NY3d 1 (N.Y. 2004) (guidance on equitable distribution factors)
- Jones v. Jones, 182 AD3d 586 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020) (deference to trial court in equitable distribution)
- Novick v. Novick, 214 AD3d 995 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023) (application of maintenance guidelines over income cap)
- Mahoney-Buntzman v. Buntzman, 12 NY3d 415 (N.Y. 2009) (trial court’s discretion in equitable distribution)
- Mesholam v. Mesholam, 11 NY3d 24 (N.Y. 2008) (marital property accrual rules)
- Anglin v. Anglin, 80 NY2d 553 (N.Y. 1992) (parties can contract out of statutory marital property rules)