Marcus v. MarcusMarcus v. Marcus
There was clear and convincing evidence that the husband‘s failure to pay child support and maintenance was willful. After plaintiff demonstrated that her husband‘s failure to make these payments was not inadvertent, he failed to sustain his burden of showing, with competent and credible evidence, his inability
The husband‘s payment of $110,000 for child support since the initial pronouncement of contempt in June 2003 does not avail him, and smacks of a tactic to delay imprisonment. Likewise, his offer to sell the parties’ Rolls Royce to enable him to make a $20,000 tuition payment is inapposite as to whether he has the financial ability to pay the remaining $439,667.
The husband‘s remaining arguments concerning due process and the rendering illusory of his right to purge contempt are untenable in light of plaintiff‘s discovery that prior to the subject hearing, he had signed an affidavit of confession of judgment acknowledging his debt of $1,836,805.57 to his deceased business partner‘s estate.
Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.