In Katz v. Katz, (S.Ct. Kings Co. NY, 07 November 2013), a New York Court said that a negotiated settlement until a Jewish Rabbinical Court (Beth Din) by a husband and wife is irrelevant because it is not formally recognized in the manner required by NY relations domestic law sec. 236B (3). As described by the Court, the woman said to him:
was a "victim of extortion" in the sum of $70.000,00 to obtain a get, a Jewish divorce, the husband... [She] alleges that she only granted joint custody and hours of access to detailed parent in writing on May 17, 2010 because "was bullied to give in to the unreasonable demands of the accused from custody, visitation and holidays" and that she believed her husband would not grant its get [a religious divorce] less than she did... She alleges that it placed $50,000.00 in trust to "ensure" that the husband would give him a get and has "did not receive [stem] money and create which has been given to the accused, and that is using [the trust] money to support this litigation."
The husband denies that the wife was a victim in the process of obtaining the get and claims... that if the wife "is not in accordance with the principles of the Jewish law and Torah or felt that the process was unfair to her, I didn't have to go through the process of getting" and what is "fake it for the benefit of the Gets and then attack the Jewish law and Torah under which it was published". "Categorically" denies receiving it money from the wife gives him a get change. Husband alleges that it is he, not the wife, who is now victim in this litigation: claims that "[i] t is only because [he] did not think [son] should be traveling to Israel, that [the woman] is now taking reprisals against [it] trying to remove value [I] [sic] in most life - custody of [his] son."
No comments:
Post a Comment