Order affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff contends that his obligation to pay alimony was extinguished by virtue of a cohabitation clause in a separation agreement which was incorporated, but not merged, into a judgment of divorce between the parties, and, therefore, that he is not a "defaulting party" within the meaning of section 244 of the Domestic Relations Law (cf. Zipparo v Zipparo,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.