Part I examined the issues raised in McGovern v. McGovern, 186 A.D.3d 988 (4th Dep’t 2020); the dichotomy between CPLR 2104 and DRL §236B(3) regarding marital agreements; and what constitutes “open court”. Part II studies the history of the departmental rift, including exceptions, and examines the dissent in McGovern.

The history of the departmental rift; the Second Department. Beginning in or about 1982, a schism evolved between the Second Department and the Third and Fourth Departments with regard to the validity and enforceability of agreements that had been dictated into the record in open court but never reduced to a writing, subscribed to by the parties and duly acknowledged in a manner entitling a deed to be recorded pursuant to §236B(3).

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]