Husband Selling Assets Before Divorce

New York bars asset dissipation during divorce. When a spouse begins draining accounts, selling valuables for less than they are worth, or hiding property, the goal is to unfairly reduce what the other spouse receives from the marital estate. Domestic Relations Law (DRL) § 236(B)(5)(d)(12) specifically lists “the wasteful dissipation of assets by either spouse” as a factor courts must weigh when dividing property. Manhattan courts take these actions seriously, and multiple legal tools exist to stop them.

At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., Manhattan property division attorney Richard Shum helps spouses throughout New York City protect their financial interests when marital assets are at risk. Whether your situation involves hidden bank accounts, undervalued sales, or transfers to third parties, our experienced NYC divorce lawyer can identify the problem and take legal action to preserve what belongs to you.

This guide explains how New York courts treat asset dissipation, what Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders (ATROs) do to freeze the status quo, the warning signs that a spouse may be hiding or selling property, and what legal remedies may be available to restore fairness. Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. at (646) 259-3416 to speak with Richard Shum about your case.

What Is Asset Dissipation in a New York Divorce?

Asset dissipation occurs when one spouse reduces the value of the marital estate through wasteful, secretive, or intentional financial conduct. This can happen before or during divorce proceedings. Under New York’s equitable distribution framework, the court considers dissipation when deciding how to divide what remains.

DRL § 236(B)(5)(d)(12) directs courts to evaluate wasteful dissipation as one of several statutory factors in property division. There is no precise statutory definition of what counts as “wasteful,” so judges examine each situation on a case-by-case basis. However, spending or transactions that appear intentional, irresponsible, or designed to punish the other spouse typically qualify.

DRL § 236(B)(5)(d)(13) adds a related factor: any transfer or encumbrance made in contemplation of a matrimonial action without fair consideration. This provision targets situations where one spouse moves assets to a friend, relative, or business entity shortly before or after filing for divorce. Together, these two statutory factors give courts broad authority to hold a dissipating spouse accountable.

How Do New York Courts Distinguish Marital and Separate Property?

The difference between marital and separate property is essential in any dissipation case. Only marital property is subject to equitable distribution, so the classification of each asset determines whether its loss affects your share.

What Counts as Marital Property?

Under DRL § 236(B)(1)(c), marital property generally includes property acquired by either or both spouses during the marriage and before the execution of a separation agreement or the commencement of a matrimonial action, regardless of how title is held. This can include real estate, vehicles, bank accounts, retirement assets, business interests, and other property acquired during that period, subject to the statute’s exclusions for separate property.

What Counts as Separate Property?

DRL § 236(B)(1)(d) defines separate property as assets owned before the marriage, received as gifts from someone other than the spouse, or acquired through inheritance. Personal injury awards for pain and suffering also remain separate. However, separate property can become marital property if it is commingled with marital assets or if both spouses contribute to its increase in value.

Why Classification Matters in Dissipation Cases

When a spouse sells or wastes an asset, the court needs to know whether that asset was marital. If a husband sells a vacation home purchased during the marriage for half its value, the court can charge the full market value against his share. If the asset was separate property, the analysis changes. Proper classification early in the case protects you from losing what is rightfully yours.

What Are Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders in a New York Divorce?

When a divorce action is commenced in New York, Automatic Temporary Restraining Orders (ATROs) take effect without a separate court hearing. These orders are set out in DRL § 236(B)(2)(b) and 22 NYCRR § 202.16-a. The plaintiff is bound immediately upon filing the summons or summons and complaint, and the defendant is bound immediately upon service of the automatic orders with the summons.

The automatic orders are designed to preserve the financial status quo. Neither spouse may sell, transfer, encumber, conceal, assign, remove, or otherwise dispose of property without the other party’s written consent or a court order, except in the usual course of business, for customary and usual household expenses, or for reasonable attorney’s fees in the action. The orders also restrict transfers from retirement assets, bar unreasonable new debt, require the parties to maintain existing medical, hospital, and dental coverage, and require them to maintain existing life, automobile, homeowners, and renters insurance. The beneficiary restriction applies specifically to existing life insurance policies.

What Expenses Are Still Permitted Under ATROs?

The orders do not prevent all spending. You can still write checks for rent, groceries, utilities, school costs, payroll, or other bills that arise in the usual course of business. Retirement distributions already in pay status continue as normal. Attorney fees for the divorce itself are also permitted.

What Happens if a Spouse Violates the ATROs?

Violating ATROs can lead to contempt proceedings. The strongest citation here is Spencer v. Spencer, in which the Appellate Division, Second Department, held that DRL § 236(B)(2)(b) and 22 NYCRR § 202.16-a constitute unequivocal mandates of the court for purposes of civil contempt during the pendency of a matrimonial action. In New York County, the Matrimonial Support Office is currently listed at Room 311, 60 Centre Street, for procedural matrimonial matters.

Property Division Attorney in Manhattan – Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq.

Richard Shum, Esq.

Richard Shum, Esq., is a Manhattan property division attorney with deep roots in New York City. A lifelong resident of the Lower East Side, he brings a personal understanding of the challenges his clients face. With years of experience in family law and litigation, he advocates for equitable property division with clarity, precision, and a client-first approach.

Mr. Shum is known for his calm and focused presence in the courtroom. He develops tailored strategies that aim for fair resolutions while avoiding unnecessary conflict. His deep connection to the Lower East Side and its diverse communities shapes an inclusive, culturally responsive practice. In addition to family law, he also advises select individuals and businesses through strategic legal consulting.

What Are Common Tactics Used to Sell or Hide Assets Before Divorce?

Spouses who want to reduce the marital estate often use predictable strategies. Recognizing these patterns early can help you and your attorney take action before the damage becomes permanent.

Transferring Property to Friends or Relatives

One common method involves transferring real estate, vehicles, or other valuable property to a friend or family member. The understanding is usually that the property will be returned after the divorce is finalized. New York courts can look past the nominal change in ownership and treat the asset as part of the marital estate. If discovered, the court may order the asset returned or adjust the division to compensate for its value.

Undervaluing and Quickly Selling High-Value Items

A spouse may sell jewelry, artwork, vehicles, or other valuable items at prices far below market value. This tactic reduces the apparent size of the marital estate. When a court identifies this behavior, it typically reassesses the true value of the sold items and adjusts the distribution accordingly. The sale price does not control the analysis.

Using Business Entities to Mask Asset Values

Spouses who own businesses sometimes manipulate company finances to obscure the true value of the enterprise. This can include creating fictitious debts, diverting income to newly opened accounts, delaying invoices, or shifting revenue to a related entity. New York courts are alert to these practices and may appoint forensic accountants to trace assets and determine accurate valuations.

Key Takeaway: Common dissipation tactics include transferring property to third parties, selling assets below market value, and using business structures to hide wealth. Courts can reverse or compensate for each of these strategies when they are identified.

The Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. can help you identify suspicious financial activity and take prompt legal action. Call (646) 259-3416 to schedule a consultation.

What Warning Signs Suggest a Spouse Is Selling Assets?

Vigilance about your spouse’s financial behavior is critical during or before a divorce. Under New York’s equitable distribution rules, both parties owe a duty of financial disclosure. Certain patterns may indicate that assets are being moved or liquidated without your knowledge.

• Sudden drops in account balances: A significant and unexplained decrease in a bank account, brokerage account, or retirement portfolio may signal unauthorized withdrawals or transfers. Both parties are required to disclose all financial activity during divorce proceedings.
• Unexplained transactions or new accounts: Wire transfers you did not authorize, large cash withdrawals, or the sudden appearance of accounts at unfamiliar institutions can indicate that funds are being redirected.
• Changes in business operations: Delayed invoicing, altered payment schedules, sudden investments in high-risk ventures, or unexplained drops in business revenue may suggest manipulation designed to temporarily reduce the apparent value of a business.
• Missing physical assets: Jewelry, art, electronics, vehicles, or other tangible valuables that disappear from the home without explanation deserve immediate attention.

These warning signs do not automatically prove dissipation, but they justify further investigation. A forensic accountant or your attorney can trace the movement of funds and determine whether the activity is legitimate.

What Steps Should You Take if You Suspect Asset Dissipation?

If you believe your spouse is selling, transferring, or wasting marital assets, acting quickly can make the difference between recovering what you are owed and losing it permanently.

Document Everything

Start by gathering and organizing every financial record you can access. This includes bank statements, credit card statements, tax returns, brokerage statements, loan documents, property deeds, and receipts for major purchases. Write down any suspicious transactions you have noticed, including dates, amounts, and the accounts involved. This documentation can form the foundation of your legal strategy.

Seek Court Intervention

If there is substantial evidence that dissipation is occurring, your attorney can ask the court for an injunction or restraining order beyond the automatic orders already in place. The New York County Supreme Court at 60 Centre Street can issue emergency orders to freeze specific accounts or prevent the sale of particular assets. These measures maintain a fair playing field while the case proceeds.

Request a Forensic Accounting Review

For complicated financial situations, especially those involving businesses, multiple investment accounts, or assets held in different names, the help of a forensic accountant can be essential. These professionals analyze financial records to uncover hidden assets, trace the movement of funds, identify irregularities, and determine accurate valuations. Their findings carry significant weight in New York courts and can be presented as evidence during equitable distribution proceedings.

How Do Courts Compensate for Dissipated Assets?

When a New York court finds that one spouse has wasted or improperly transferred marital property, it has several tools to restore fairness in the final distribution.

Reclamation of Transferred Assets

If assets were transferred without proper justification, the court can order their return to the marital estate. This might involve reversing an improper property transfer, recovering funds removed from joint accounts, or voiding a sale that lacked fair consideration. Courts exercise this remedy when the assets can still be physically recovered.

Charging Dissipated Value Against the Offender’s Share

More often, dissipated assets cannot be directly reclaimed because they have already been spent or sold. In these situations, the court calculates the value of the wasted assets and deducts that amount from the offending spouse’s share of what remains.

For example, if a spouse sold a piece of property worth $100,000 for $40,000, the court may treat the full $100,000 as having been received by that spouse. This reduces the offending spouse’s share of the remaining marital estate by that amount.

Adjustments to Maintenance and Child Support

Asset dissipation is primarily addressed through equitable-distribution remedies, such as credits, unequal distribution, or other adjustments to the division of marital property. It may also affect related financial issues in an individual case, but it should not be presented as a routine basis for increasing child support.

Monetary Penalties and Attorney Fee Awards

Beyond adjusting the property division, courts can impose direct penalties on a spouse who violatesviolated financial fairness. The offending spouse may be ordered to pay the other party’s legal fees and forensic accounting costs incurred in uncovering the dissipation.

The following table summarizes the primary remedies available:

Remedy	When It Applies	How It Works
Asset Reclamation	Transferred assets can still be recovered	The court orders return of property or funds to the marital estate
Value Charged to Offender’s Share	Assets are spent or sold and cannot be recovered	Full value deducted from the dissipating spouse’s equitable share
Equitable-Distribution Adjustment	Dissipation is proven and the court must restore fairness in dividing marital property	The court may award a credit, charge the dissipated value against the offending spouse’s share, or otherwise adjust distribution to account for the loss
Attorney Fees and Costs	A forensic investigation was needed to uncover dissipation	The offending spouse is ordered to pay legal and accounting costs

How Does New York Protect Against Unfair Asset Distribution?

New York’s equitable distribution framework includes multiple safeguards designed to prevent one spouse from gaining an unfair advantage during divorce.

Equitable Distribution Under DRL § 236

Equitable distribution does not mean a fifty-fifty split. Instead, the court considers a comprehensive list of statutory factors under DRL § 236(B)(5)(d), including each spouse’s income, the length of the marriage, each party’s age and health, contributions as a homemaker or wage earner, and the probable future financial circumstances of each party. The court aims for a result that is fair based on the totality of the circumstances.

Mandatory Financial Disclosure

New York law requires full financial disclosure from both spouses during divorce proceedings. Under 22 NYCRR § 202.16, each party must file a sworn Statement of Net Worth that details all income, assets, debts, and expenses. The Matrimonial Support Office at the New York County Supreme Court oversees compliance with these disclosure requirements. Failure to disclose can result in sanctions, adverse inferences, or a more favorable distribution to the non-violating spouse.

Consequences of Violating Disclosure Requirements

If a spouse is found to have hidden assets or lied about financial circumstances, the court may impose penalties. These can include monetary fines, an unfavorable adjustment in property division, or an order to pay the other party’s attorney fees. The courts treat dishonesty in financial disclosures as a serious matter that undermines the integrity of the entire proceeding.

Key Takeaway: New York protects against unfair distribution through equitable distribution principles, mandatory financial disclosure, and penalties for concealment. These safeguards work together to promote transparency and fairness throughout the divorce process.

The Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. can help you enforce your right to full disclosure and a fair property division. Call (646) 259-3416.

Legal Guidance from a Manhattan Property Division Attorney

Discovering that your spouse is selling or hiding assets before a divorce requires immediate attention. Because the financial decisions made during this period will impact your long-term stability, acting quickly to protect your rights is critical.

Richard Shum has helped clients throughout Manhattan and New York City address asset dissipation and pursue fair property division outcomes. At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., our property division attorney works with forensic accountants and financial professionals to trace assets, enforce disclosure requirements, and present strong cases at the New York County Supreme Court at 60 Centre Street.

Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. at (646) 259-3416 for a consultation. Our office, located at 20 Clinton Street on the Lower East Side, serves families across Manhattan and throughout New York City. Take the first step toward protecting your financial future.

from Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. https://www.romanshum.com/blog/husband-selling-assets-before-divorce/

What Are Grandparents’ Rights in New York?

In New York, grandparents may petition Family Court for visitation, and in limited cases, custody, under Domestic Relations Law (DRL) § 72. The statute does not create automatic visitation rights. Instead, visitation cases generally require a two-step analysis: the grandparent must first establish standing, and then show that visitation is in the child’s best interests. When custody (not visitation) is sought, the grandparent must first prove “extraordinary circumstances” as defined in DRL § 72(2), and only then does the court reach a best-interests analysis.

At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., Manhattan family law attorney Richard Roman Shum helps grandparents in Manhattan and throughout New York City pursue visitation and custody petitions in Family Court. We understand what is at stake when a grandparent’s bond with a grandchild is threatened. Our divorce lawyer provides guidance at every stage, from preparing the initial petition to representing grandparents at hearings at the Manhattan Family Court located at 60 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10013.

This guide explains when grandparents have standing to petition for visitation, how courts evaluate those petitions, how the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Troxel v. Granville shapes New York Family Court decisions, when grandparents may seek custody instead of visitation, and how to build a compelling case. Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. at (646) 259-3416 to speak with Richard Roman Shum about your situation.

How Does New York Law Define Grandparents’ Visitation Rights?

Under New York’s Domestic Relations Law § 72, grandparents may apply to Family Court for an order of visitation with their grandchildren when certain legal conditions are met. The statute establishes a two-step framework. First, the grandparent must demonstrate legal standing to bring the petition. Second, if standing is found, the court determines whether granting visitation would serve the child’s best interests.

New York courts give substantial weight to a fit parent’s decision to restrict grandparent contact. Parents hold a constitutionally protected right to direct the upbringing of their children, and courts do not override that decision lightly. The burden falls on the grandparent to show that their involvement would benefit the child, not simply that they have a desire to maintain the relationship.

Key Takeaway: New York’s Domestic Relations Law § 72 provides a two-step framework for grandparent visitation petitions: the grandparent must first establish legal standing, then demonstrate that visitation serves the child’s best interests. A fit parent’s objection is given substantial weight throughout the process.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Troxel v. Granville (2000) reinforced this framework. The Court held that a parent’s right to make decisions about their child’s upbringing is a fundamental liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. New York courts responded by applying “special weight” to a fit parent’s objection, meaning grandparents must produce compelling evidence that their involvement benefits the child before visitation will be ordered over parental opposition.

When Can a Grandparent Petition for Visitation in New York?

Establishing standing is the threshold question in every grandparent visitation case. DRL § 72 applies to a minor child “residing within this state.” In interstate situations, however, which state has authority to make a custody/visitation determination can also depend on New York’s UCCJEA jurisdiction rules (including the child’s “home state”). Beyond these threshold issues, the standing analysis depends on whether one or both parents are alive and whether equitable circumstances warrant court intervention.

When a Parent Is Deceased, Divorced, or Absent

Grandparents have automatic standing to petition for visitation when one or both parents are deceased. New York law acknowledges that the loss of a parent may make a grandparent’s presence especially meaningful for the child’s emotional stability and sense of family connection.

When parents are divorced or separated, grandparents may petition for visitation, but standing is still not automatic unless a parent is deceased. In these cases, the court typically evaluates whether equitable circumstances warrant intervention, considering factors such as the nature and extent of the grandparent-grandchild relationship and the nature and basis of the parents’ objection, before reaching the separate best-interests analysis.

Applying the Equitable Circumstances Test

When both parents are alive and jointly oppose grandparent visitation, the petitioner must satisfy a threshold known as the “equitable circumstances” test before the court will consider the merits of the request. This standard requires a showing that conditions exist that warrant court intervention despite intact parental objection.

Relevant factors include the nature and extent of the grandparent-grandchild relationship, the efforts the grandparent made to maintain or establish contact, any interference by parents that limited the relationship, and the reasons parents give for their opposition. Grandparents with a documented history of involvement, such as attending school events, providing regular childcare, or maintaining consistent communication, are generally better positioned to meet this standard.

Once equitable circumstances are established, the court moves to the best interests analysis. These two steps are sequential: if equitable circumstances cannot be demonstrated, the petition will not proceed to a merits determination.

Special Rules for Intact Families

New York courts apply their most careful scrutiny when both parents are married, living together, and jointly raising their child. The presumption is strong that two present, fit, and engaged parents act in their child’s best interests, and their decision to limit grandparent contact reflects that judgment.

In intact-family cases where fit parents jointly oppose visitation, courts scrutinize standing especially carefully and give significant weight to the parents’ reasons for opposing visitation. Courts consider the nature and extent of the existing relationship and whether equitable circumstances warrant intervention; it is not enough for grandparents to allege love and affection alone.

How Do Courts Evaluate a Grandparent Visitation Petition?

Once standing is established, the Family Court conducts a multi-factor analysis to determine whether granting visitation serves the child’s best interests. The court examines the totality of circumstances rather than applying a fixed formula, which means the quality and continuity of the grandparent-grandchild bond typically carry more weight than the simple frequency of past visits.

Judges consider factors such as the depth and duration of the relationship, the grandparent’s willingness to support the parent-child relationship, the potential effect of visitation on the child’s emotional development, and any history of conflict between the grandparent and the parents that could harm the child. The child’s own preferences may also be considered, particularly for older children who can articulate their views in a meaningful way.

Family Court may appoint an attorney for the child, who represents the child’s interests in the proceeding. Appointment is mandatory in certain case types and discretionary in others; in custody/visitation matters, the court may appoint an attorney for the child when the judge determines it would serve the purposes of the Family Court Act.

The following table summarizes the key legal distinctions between grandparent visitation and grandparent custody petitions under New York law:

Legal Aspect	Grandparent Visitation	Grandparent Custody
Governing statute	New York DRL § 72	DRL § 72(2); Family Court Act § 651(b)
Initial threshold	Legal standing	Extraordinary circumstances
Qualifying conditions	Parent deceased, divorced, or absent; equitable circumstances	Extraordinary circumstances under DRL § 72(2), including “extended disruption of custody”
Best interests required?	Yes, after standing is established	Yes, after extraordinary circumstances are established
Effect on parental rights	Fit parents’ objection given special weight	Parental rights may be overridden
Where filed in Manhattan	New York County Family Court, 60 Lafayette St.	New York County Family Court, 60 Lafayette St.

Call (646) 259-3416 to discuss how these standards apply to your situation.

Family Law Attorney in Manhattan – Richard Roman Shum

Richard Roman Shum, Esq.

Richard Roman Shum, Esq. is a lifelong New Yorker and resident of the Lower East Side who has built his practice around family law representation in Manhattan. He founded the firm with a commitment to providing families with clear, pragmatic, and powerful legal advocacy. As a father himself, Mr. Shum brings a personal understanding of what is at stake when family court proceedings involve children.

Richard Roman Shum takes a focused, detail-oriented approach with every client, guiding families through each step of the legal process with calm and precision. His practice serves individuals throughout Manhattan and New York City, with particular emphasis on matters involving custody, visitation, and family relationships.

How to File a Grandparent Visitation Petition in Manhattan

Grandparents seeking visitation in Manhattan must file a petition with the New York County Family Court at 60 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10013. The petition is filed in the county where the child resides, which for Manhattan families means New York County. The filing initiates the formal legal process and requires the petitioner to state the basis for standing and describe the relationship with the grandchild.

Preparing strong supporting documentation before filing can make a meaningful difference in the outcome. Evidence that courts find persuasive includes photographs of shared activities and milestones, records of visits and phone calls, letters or cards exchanged with the grandchild, school or medical records showing the grandparent’s involvement, and affidavits from teachers, neighbors, or other witnesses who have observed the relationship firsthand.

After filing, the petitioner must formally serve notice on the child’s parents or legal guardians. Proper service is a legal requirement, and any defect can delay or jeopardize the proceeding. The court will then schedule an initial hearing to review the petition and determine next steps.

What Happens After the Initial Hearing

At the initial hearing, the judge reviews the submitted evidence and hears arguments from both sides. The court may appoint an attorney for the child to represent the child’s interests independently. Depending on the evidence presented, the judge may request additional submissions, schedule follow-up hearings, or refer the parties to mediation.

Mediation is available through the New York City Family Court system and can be an effective path to a negotiated visitation arrangement. A neutral mediator facilitates discussion between the grandparent and the parents to develop a schedule that reflects the family’s specific circumstances. Courts generally view a willingness to engage in mediation favorably, and a mediated agreement can be incorporated into a court order.

If the court grants visitation, it will issue an order specifying the schedule, frequency, duration, and any conditions of visits. Either party may seek a modification of that order if circumstances change materially. Enforcement proceedings are also available if a visitation order is not complied with.

When Can Grandparents Seek Custody in New York?

Grandparents may pursue custody of a grandchild when a parent’s inability to provide adequate care rises to the level of extraordinary circumstances. Because custody directly overrides parental rights, the legal threshold is significantly higher than it is for visitation. The court will not reach the best interests analysis at all unless extraordinary circumstances are first established.

What Qualifies as Extraordinary Circumstances

New York courts have identified the following as circumstances that can support a grandparent custody petition:

• Parental abandonment: A parent has voluntarily relinquished care and control of the child for an extended period.
• Persistent neglect: An ongoing failure to provide proper care, supervision, or financial support.
• Parental unfitness: Issues such as substance abuse, mental illness, or a history of abuse that substantially impair the parent’s ability to care for the child.
• Extended disruption of custody: The child has lived with the grandparent for a significant period, typically 24 months or more, during which the parent did not maintain a consistent relationship with the child.

Establishing any one of these conditions is the prerequisite for the court to consider whether grandparent custody serves the child’s best interests. The extraordinary circumstances threshold is intentionally demanding because it requires overriding a constitutionally protected parental right.

Emergency Custody Applications

When a child faces immediate danger due to abuse, neglect, or another serious threat, grandparents may file an emergency custody application without waiting for a standard hearing date. New York law allows these emergency applications when there is reasonable cause to believe that a child’s life or health is in imminent danger.

The court may issue a temporary order placing the child in the grandparent’s care while the matter proceeds through the standard hearing process. Emergency applications require clear, immediate factual evidence of the danger the child faces.

Key Takeaway: Grandparents pursuing custody in New York must first establish extraordinary circumstances such as parental abandonment, persistent neglect, parental unfitness, or extended disruption of custody. Only after that threshold is met does the court apply the best interests standard to determine whether grandparent custody is appropriate.

How Can Grandparents Build a Strong Visitation Case?

Grandparents who have maintained consistent involvement in a grandchild’s life are generally better positioned to succeed on a visitation petition. Courts look for evidence of a genuine, meaningful relationship whose continuation would benefit the child. Building that evidentiary record before filing is one of the most practical steps a grandparent can take.

Useful documentation includes photographs capturing shared activities and milestones, records of visits and phone and video calls, correspondence such as letters and birthday cards, and notes about school events, medical appointments, or other meaningful occasions where the grandparent played a role. The more detailed and contemporaneous this record is, the more clearly it demonstrates the depth of the relationship to the court.

Expert Evaluations and Witness Testimony

In cases where the child’s emotional needs are at issue, a licensed mental health professional may be able to evaluate the grandparent-grandchild relationship and offer a professional opinion on how continued contact would support the child’s well-being. Courts can give significant weight to such evaluations, particularly when the impact of severing the relationship is disputed.

Third-party witness testimony from teachers, pediatricians, coaches, or neighbors who have directly observed the relationship can also be valuable. These perspectives provide an objective view of the grandparent’s role in the child’s day-to-day life that complements the grandparent’s own account.

Mediation is another avenue worth considering before proceeding to a contested hearing. Resolving a visitation dispute through mediation can preserve family relationships, lower legal costs, and produce a tailored arrangement that accounts for the family’s particular dynamics. Courts in Manhattan view a grandparent’s willingness to pursue a cooperative resolution favorably when considering the child’s best interests.

Key Takeaway: A strong grandparent visitation case is built on documented evidence of consistent involvement, third-party witness statements, and where appropriate, expert evaluations of the child’s emotional relationship with the grandparent. Pursuing mediation before litigation can also demonstrate good faith and produce a faster, more flexible outcome.

Get Legal Assistance from a Manhattan Family Law Attorney

Grandparent visitation and custody cases involve deeply personal stakes and demanding legal standards. Whether you are seeking regular visits with a grandchild whose parents have restricted your access or pursuing custody because a parent can no longer provide adequate care, the process requires careful preparation and a thorough understanding of New York family law.

Richard Roman Shum has helped families handle complicated family law matters throughout Manhattan and New York City. At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., he evaluates each grandparent’s situation individually, prepares thorough legal filings, and presents a case centered on the child’s best interests. We handle proceedings at New York County Family Court and advise grandparents on alternatives such as mediation when those options serve the family better than contested litigation. 

Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. at (646) 259-3416 to schedule a free consultation. Our office is located at 20 Clinton St., New York, NY 10002, and serves grandparents throughout Manhattan and the broader New York area. We are available to evaluate your legal options and help you take the steps necessary to protect your relationship with your grandchild.

from Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. https://www.romanshum.com/what-are-grandparents-rights-in-new-york/

What Is the Prenup Infidelity Clause?

An infidelity clause in a prenuptial agreement is a provision that attempts to impose financial consequences if a spouse commits adultery during the marriage. Couples in Manhattan and across New York City sometimes consider these clauses when significant assets or business interests are at stake. Under New York law, however, enforcement is uncertain. Although DRL § 236(B)(3) allows marital agreements to address maintenance and other terms of the marriage relationship, New York’s no-fault divorce framework and general public-policy concerns can make adultery-based penalty provisions difficult to enforce in practice.

At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC, Manhattan family law attorney Richard Roman Shum helps couples create prenuptial agreements tailored to their goals and grounded in New York law. Our NYC divorce lawyer can evaluate whether an infidelity clause makes sense for your specific situation and explain how New York courts have approached these provisions. 

This guide explains what an infidelity clause is, how it is drafted, whether New York courts enforce these clauses, what factors affect that outcome, and how to approach the conversation with your partner before the wedding. Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC at (646) 259-3416 to discuss your prenuptial agreement.

What Is a Prenuptial Agreement Under New York Law?

Under New York DRL § 236(B)(3), a prenuptial agreement is a contract made before marriage that can govern issues such as property division, maintenance, and other terms of the marriage relationship. To be enforceable in a matrimonial action, the agreement must be in writing, subscribed by the parties, and acknowledged or proven in the manner required for a deed. If challenged, New York courts generally enforce duly executed prenuptial agreements unless the challenging party proves grounds such as unconscionability, fraud, duress, overreaching, or other inequitable conduct.

A typical prenuptial agreement covers property division, spousal support, and debt liability. It may also address business interests, inheritance rights, and how assets accumulated during the marriage will be treated. These provisions give both parties a clear financial framework before the wedding, which can reduce conflict and legal costs if the marriage later ends in divorce.

Couples in Manhattan frequently seek prenuptial agreements when one or both partners own real estate, hold significant business interests, or have children from a prior relationship. Contested prenuptial agreements that proceed to litigation are handled by the Matrimonial Part of the New York County Supreme Court, located at 60 Centre Street in lower Manhattan, making careful and precise drafting especially important.

What Does an Infidelity Clause in a Prenup Do?

An infidelity clause, sometimes called a “no-cheating clause” or “fidelity clause,” is a prenuptial provision that specifies financial consequences if one spouse commits adultery. A typical clause requires the offending spouse to pay a predetermined amount, forfeit certain assets, or give up entitlement to spousal support. The penalty serves both to deter infidelity and to provide some financial compensation to the non-offending spouse.

These clauses vary significantly in how they define infidelity. Some couples adopt a broad definition covering any romantic or sexual contact outside the marriage. Others limit the clause to specific physical acts, which requires more precise proof but ensures both parties fully understand what conduct triggers the penalty. The definition matters because it determines what evidence would be needed to establish a violation.

Including an infidelity clause also serves purposes beyond deterrence. It creates a structured opportunity for couples to discuss relationship expectations before marriage, and it signals mutual commitment to fidelity. For couples with substantial assets in professional and financial industries, these clauses can also provide some financial predictability in the event of a breakdown caused by adultery.

Key Takeaway: An infidelity clause specifies financial penalties for adultery within a prenuptial agreement. The clause’s definition of infidelity, evidentiary requirements, and penalty structure all affect whether it will carry meaningful weight if a dispute arises.

Family Law Attorney in Manhattan – Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC

Richard Roman Shum, Esq.

Richard Roman Shum, Esq. is a lifelong New Yorker and resident of Manhattan’s Lower East Side who has dedicated his practice to family law matters affecting individuals and families throughout New York. He brings years of legal experience to prenuptial agreements, divorce, and related proceedings, applying a focused and detail-oriented approach to each client’s unique situation.

Mr. Shum guides clients through the prenuptial agreement process with clarity and precision. He takes a pragmatic approach to each case, working to help clients achieve agreements that reflect their actual goals while holding up to legal scrutiny under New York law.

How Do You Draft an Infidelity Clause in a New York Prenuptial Agreement?

A valid infidelity clause should clearly define what conduct constitutes infidelity in the relationship. Couples may choose a broad definition that includes any romantic or sexual activity outside the marriage, or a narrower one confined to specific physical acts. A broader definition may be easier to satisfy in terms of evidence, but could capture conduct that one party does not view as a genuine breach.

The clause should also specify the standard of proof required to establish infidelity. Many prenuptial agreements apply the civil standard of a “preponderance of the evidence,” meaning it is more likely than not that infidelity occurred. A higher standard increases protection against unfounded claims but also raises the bar for the spouse who wants to enforce the clause.

Financial penalties must be reasonable to have any chance of surviving legal scrutiny. A penalty that forfeits all of one spouse’s marital assets for a single act of infidelity is more likely to be considered unconscionable by a court. Proportional penalties tied to the actual financial and emotional harm caused by the infidelity are more defensible.

Confidentiality provisions are also worth including. These limit how evidence of infidelity may be used and restrict access to sensitive personal information. Privacy protections are particularly relevant for clients in professional and financial industries where reputational concerns are significant, and they help prevent proceedings from becoming unnecessarily public.

Key Takeaway: An effective infidelity clause defines infidelity clearly, applies a specific proof standard, sets proportional financial penalties, and includes confidentiality protections. Vague definitions and extreme penalties both increase the risk that a court will decline to enforce the clause.

For guidance on drafting prenuptial provisions that are clear, proportional, and legally sound under New York law, contact the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC at (646) 259-3416.

Do Infidelity Clauses Hold Up in New York Courts?

Infidelity clauses are among the most legally uncertain provisions a couple can include in a New York prenuptial agreement. Because New York is a no-fault divorce state under DRL § 170(7), courts do not require either party to prove wrongdoing to obtain a divorce. This framework shapes how judges view contract provisions that penalize specific marital conduct.

The New York appellate authority does not establish a bright-line rule that all infidelity clauses are unenforceable. But enforcement remains uncertain. New York courts strongly favor enforcement of duly executed marital agreements, while also applying heightened scrutiny to challenged maintenance-related provisions and refusing to enforce terms that are unconscionable or contrary to public policy. Because no-fault divorce has reduced the legal importance of proving adultery, an infidelity-based penalty provision may invite litigation over private conduct and face significant scrutiny if enforcement is contested.

There is also a risk that an infidelity clause could compromise the broader prenuptial agreement. If a court finds the clause unconscionable, it may disregard that provision, and in some cases, the presence of an extreme clause can be used as evidence that the agreement as a whole was overreaching. Discussing this risk with a prenuptial agreement attorney before finalizing the language is an important step.

What Factors Affect Whether a New York Court Will Enforce an Infidelity Clause?

New York Courts consider a number of issues when deciding whether an infidelity clause is enforceable:

Does the Clause Conflict with Public Policy?

New York courts are cautious about enforcing contract terms that regulate personal conduct within marriage. A clause that imposes financial consequences for behavior that a no-fault divorce law treats as legally irrelevant to the dissolution of a marriage is likely to face judicial resistance. Courts will examine whether the clause promotes marital discord or incentivizes litigation over private matters.

Is There Clear Evidence of Infidelity?

Even if a court were willing to consider enforcing the clause, proof would still be a major practical hurdle. The required proof standard may depend on the language of the agreement and the procedural posture of the case. For adultery claims generally, New York courts recognize that adultery is often proved through circumstantial evidence, and New York CourtHelp notes that evidence from someone other than the spouses is ordinarily needed when adultery is asserted as a divorce ground. In practice, proving a violation can require highly personal evidence and make the dispute costly and intrusive.

Are the Penalties Fair and Proportionate?

A court has the discretion to void provisions that appear unconscionable, meaning so one-sided or punitive that enforcement would be unjust. Financial penalties that are disproportionate to the actual harm caused, or that effectively strip the offending spouse of all assets, are particularly vulnerable to this analysis. Proportional penalties tied to specific and demonstrable harms have a better chance of surviving judicial scrutiny.

What Is the Context of the Overall Agreement?

How the infidelity clause fits within the prenuptial agreement as a whole also matters. A clause embedded in a balanced, fair agreement, entered into by both parties with independent legal counsel and adequate time for review, stands a stronger chance of being upheld. The Matrimonial Part of Manhattan’s New York County Supreme Court has broad discretion in evaluating these factors, and outcomes can vary considerably from case to case.

Factors Affecting Infidelity Clause Enforceability in New York

Factor	Court’s Concern	Effect on Enforceability
Public Policy	Conflicts with no-fault divorce principles under DRL § 170(7)	Reduces the likelihood of enforcement
Evidence Standard	Adultery allegations are fact-intensive and may require corroborating or circumstantial evidence, depending on the agreement and procedural posture	Can be costly, intrusive, and difficult to litigate
Penalty Proportionality	Must not be unconscionable or grossly one-sided	Disproportionate penalties likely voided by the court
Clause Clarity	Vague definitions create interpretation disputes	Precise definitions improve enforceability
Overall Agreement Fairness	The agreement as a whole must be equitable	An unfair agreement weakens all individual provisions

Key Takeaway: Whether a New York court enforces an infidelity clause depends on its alignment with public policy, the quality of available evidence, the proportionality of the penalties, and the overall fairness of the prenuptial agreement. No outcome is guaranteed without careful drafting and legal guidance.

For guidance specific to your prenuptial agreement, contact the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC at (646) 259-3416.

What Role Does an Infidelity Clause Play in New York Divorce Proceedings?

Under New York law, spousal support is determined by DRL § 236(B) based on financial factors such as each spouse’s income, earning capacity, and the length of the marriage. Marital misconduct, including infidelity, is not a standard factor in those calculations. An infidelity clause in a prenuptial agreement does not automatically alter what a spouse receives in support or assets when a marriage ends.

If a court chooses to enforce the clause, the financial penalties it specifies could effectively reduce the offending spouse’s share of support or assets. This would be an exception rather than the rule. The burden of proving infidelity rests on the spouse asserting the claim, and that spouse must satisfy whatever evidentiary standard is set in the agreement during contested proceedings.

If both spouses committed infidelity, many prenuptial agreements address this by voiding the clause or treating the violations symmetrically to cancel out the penalties. Without such a provision in the agreement, a court in a no-fault divorce state like New York is unlikely to impose financial penalties on either party based on mutual fault.

Talk to a Manhattan Family Law Attorney Today

A prenuptial agreement that includes an infidelity clause raises legal questions that go beyond personal preferences. The enforceability of the clause under New York’s no-fault divorce framework, the evidentiary standards required to trigger it, and the risk that an extreme clause could compromise the broader agreement are all considerations that require careful legal guidance.

Richard Roman Shum has guided clients through prenuptial agreements involving complicated and sensitive provisions, including infidelity clauses. At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC, our prenuptial agreement attorney works with clients to draft provisions that are clear, proportional, and aligned with New York law. 

Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., PLLC at (646) 259-3416 to schedule a consultation. Our office is located at 20 Clinton St., New York, NY 10002, serving clients throughout Manhattan and the surrounding areas. Richard Roman Shum can advise you on whether a prenuptial infidelity clause is worth including, how it may be treated under New York law, and what language may help reduce the risk of future disputes.

from Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. https://www.romanshum.com/blog/what-is-the-prenup-infidelity-clause/

How Much Does a Divorce Cost in Manhattan?

A divorce in Manhattan can cost as little as $335 in court filing fees for a do-it-yourself case or well over $50,000 for a contested case that goes to trial. The total depends on whether you and your spouse agree on the terms, how many assets are involved, and whether children are part of the equation.

At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., Manhattan divorce attorney Richard Roman Shum helps clients understand their costs upfront so they can plan accordingly. Ourteam guides New York City families through contested and uncontested divorces, property division, child custody, and spousal support matters throughout New York.

This guide breaks down court filing fees, attorney costs, mediation expenses, and the factors that drive divorce costs higher. It also explains options if you cannot afford to file and how working with an experienced attorney can help protect your financial interests.

If you are considering divorce in Manhattan, we can help you understand the likely costs and your available options. Contact the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. at (646) 259-3416 to schedule a consultation.

What Are the Court Filing Fees for a Divorce in New York?

Every divorce in New York requires filing with the Supreme Court, which is the only court authorized to handle divorce cases in the state. These are the standard court filing costs unless the court grants a fee waiver.

The standard court fees total at least $335, but the fee path depends on the case. In an uncontested divorce, that usually means a $210 index number fee plus a $125 uncontested matrimonial calendar fee. In a contested divorce, the common fee path is $210 for the index number, $95 for the Request for Judicial Intervention, and $30 for the Note of Issue after the RJI fee has been paid.

Fee Type	Amount
Index number (case filing)	$210
Request for Judicial Intervention (contested cases)	$95
Uncontested matrimonial calendar fee	$125
Note of Issue after RJI	$30
Settlement agreement/stipulation of settlement filing	$35
Motion or cross-motion	$45 each
Certified copy of Judgment of Divorce	$8 per copy

These fees are set by New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) and apply statewide. Manhattan divorces are filed with the New York County Clerk’s Office, which processes all Supreme Court filings for the borough. You may also need to pay for the service of process, which typically costs $40 to $75 to have someone officially deliver the divorce papers to your spouse.

Key Takeaway: The minimum court cost for any New York divorce is $335, which includes the $210 index number fee and the $125 Note of Issue fee. Additional fees for motions, settlement agreements, and certified copies can add to the total.

How Much Does an Uncontested Divorce Cost?

An uncontested divorce is one where both spouses agree on all major terms, including property division, child custody, child support, and spousal maintenance. Because there are no disputes for the court to resolve, the process is faster, simpler, and significantly less expensive than a contested divorce.

Most people who pursue an uncontested divorce still hire an attorney to draft or review the settlement agreement and prepare the court paperwork. Manhattan divorce attorneys typically charge a flat fee for uncontested cases, which generally ranges from $1,500 to $5,500. Flat-fee arrangements give you a predictable total cost rather than an open-ended hourly bill. The final amount depends on your situation, including whether you have children, own real estate, or need to divide retirement accounts.

Online document preparation services offer another option, typically charging between $300 and $1,000. These services prepare the forms for you, but do not provide legal advice about your rights or review the fairness of your agreement. If your settlement includes provisions about property, support, or children, having an attorney review the terms can help prevent costly problems later.

How Much Does a Contested Divorce Cost in Manhattan?

A contested divorce occurs when spouses disagree on one or more major issues, such as how to divide property, who gets custody of the children, or whether one spouse should pay support to the other. These cases require court intervention and often involve extended negotiations, discovery, motion practice, and sometimes trial.

The total cost of a contested divorce in Manhattan generally ranges from $15,000 to $50,000, though highly complex cases involving child custody battles, business ownership, or substantial assets can exceed $100,000. The length of the case is a major cost driver because every court appearance, deposition, motion, and negotiation session adds billable hours. A case that settles after several months of negotiation will cost far less than one that goes to a full trial at the Manhattan Supreme Court.

Beyond attorney fees, contested divorces often require additional professional services. Forensic accountants may be needed to value businesses or trace hidden assets, and real estate appraisers determine the fair market value of property.

Child custody evaluators may be appointed when parents cannot agree on parenting arrangements. Each of these experts can add thousands of dollars to the total cost of your case.

What Factors Affect the Total Cost of Divorce?

Several factors determine where your divorce will fall on the cost spectrum. 

How Do Child Custody Disputes Affect Cost?

Custody disputes are among the most expensive aspects of any divorce. When parents cannot agree on a custody arrangement, the court may appoint a forensic evaluator or an attorney for the child, both of which add significant expense. Under New York Domestic Relations Law (DRL) § 240, courts determine custody based on the best interests of the child, considering factors such as each parent’s ability to provide a stable home and the child’s relationship with each parent.

Child support calculations follow the Child Support Standards Act (CSSA), which applies a formula to the parents’ combined income up to a statutory cap of $193,000 as of March 2026. For one child, the formula applies 17% of combined parental income; for two children, it is 25%. Disputes over income, imputed income, or add-on expenses like childcare and medical costs can extend negotiations and increase legal fees.

How Does Property Division Increase Costs?

New York follows an equitable distribution model under DRL § 236(B), which means marital property is divided fairly but not necessarily equally. The court considers 15 statutory factors, including the length of the marriage, each spouse’s income and property, the parties’ contributions to the marriage, and any instances of domestic violence.

In Manhattan, property division often involves high-value real estate, investment portfolios, retirement accounts, and business interests. Valuing these assets typically requires expert appraisals, which can cost $1,500 to $10,000 or more. A co-op on the Upper East Side, a business partnership, or stock options all require careful analysis that adds time and expense to the case.

How Does Spousal Maintenance Factor In?

Spousal maintenance, sometimes called alimony, is calculated using a statutory formula under DRL § 236(B)(6). The formula applies to the payor’s income up to a cap of $241,000 as of March 2026. For income above the cap, the court has discretion to award additional maintenance based on 15 statutory factors, including the standard of living during the marriage and each spouse’s earning capacity.

Maintenance disputes can increase costs because they often involve detailed financial analysis. If one spouse owns a business or has complex income sources, determining the correct income figure for the formula may require forensic accounting. The duration of maintenance is also guided by statute and tied to the length of the marriage, which can become a point of contention in negotiations.

Key Takeaway: Child custody disputes, high-value property division, and spousal maintenance disagreements are the three factors most likely to increase divorce costs. Each may require expert witnesses, extended negotiations, and additional court appearances.

Can Mediation Reduce Divorce Costs in Manhattan?

Mediation is a process where a neutral third party helps both spouses reach an agreement on contested issues without going to trial. It is generally faster, less adversarial, and less expensive than traditional litigation. Many Manhattan couples use mediation to resolve disputes about property division, custody, and support before finalizing their divorce.

Private mediators in Manhattan typically charge from $300 and up per hour. While this is a significant hourly rate, the total cost of mediation is usually much lower than litigation because cases tend to resolve in a fraction of the time. A mediated divorce may require only a few sessions to reach a full agreement, compared to months or years of contested litigation.

Each spouse may still want to consult with their own attorney during mediation to ensure the agreement protects their rights. This “review counsel” role is less expensive than full representation in a contested case because the attorney provides advice rather than handling all aspects of the litigation. The New York County Supreme Court encourages alternative dispute resolution and may refer cases to mediation during the divorce process.

Mediation is not appropriate in every situation. Cases involving domestic violence, significant power imbalances, or hidden assets may require the protections that formal litigation provides. However, for couples who can communicate and negotiate in good faith, mediation can reduce the total cost of divorce by thousands of dollars.

Key Takeaway: Mediation typically costs upwards of $300 per hour but can significantly reduce overall divorce expenses by resolving disputes more quickly than litigation. Each spouse should still consult with an independent attorney to review any mediated agreement.

Divorce Attorney in Manhattan – Law Office of Richard Roman Shum

Richard Roman Shum, Esq.

Richard Roman Shum, Esq., is a Manhattan family law attorney with over 15 years of experience in divorce, child custody, spousal support, and property division. A lifelong New Yorker and resident of the Lower East Side, he brings a grounded understanding of the unique challenges Manhattan families face during divorce. His career has focused exclusively on family law and matrimonial matters.

Mr. Shum is known for his calm, detail-oriented approach and his ability to develop focused case strategies that prioritize his clients’ goals. Clients and colleagues describe him as technically proficient, highly effective, and an excellent negotiator. Whether through negotiation or litigation, he works to resolve cases efficiently and achieve outcomes that protect his clients’ families, finances, and futures.

What if You Cannot Afford to File for Divorce?

New York courts recognize that the cost of divorce can be a barrier for people with limited income. Several options exist to reduce or eliminate the financial burden of filing.

If you receive public benefits, are low-income, or cannot pay court fees without sacrificing basic household needs, you can ask the court for a fee waiver. To request a waiver, file the court’s current fee-waiver application forms for poor person’s relief with your divorce papers. If the court grants the application, you will not have to pay the $335 filing fee or other court costs.

New York law also provides a mechanism for one spouse to request that the other spouse pay their attorney fees. Under DRL § 237, the court may direct the higher-earning spouse to pay a portion or all of the other spouse’s legal costs. This provision is designed to level the playing field so that a spouse with fewer financial resources can still obtain quality legal representation. The court considers each spouse’s financial circumstances, the merits of the case, and the relative ability to pay when deciding whether to award counsel fees.

Key Takeaway: Fee waivers, counsel fee awards under DRL § 237, and legal aid resources can help reduce or eliminate divorce costs for people with limited income. The court can also order a wealthier spouse to contribute to the other spouse’s legal fees, depending on the circumstances of the case.

How Can You Reduce Divorce Costs?

While some divorce expenses are unavoidable, there are practical steps you can take to keep costs manageable without compromising the outcome of your case.

• Organize your financial documents early. Gather bank statements, tax returns, pay stubs, mortgage documents, retirement account statements, and credit card records before your first meeting with an attorney. This saves your attorney time and reduces billable hours.
• Communicate efficiently with your attorney. Consolidate your questions into a single email or call rather than reaching out for every minor issue. Frequent short communications add up quickly when billed in increments.
• Consider an uncontested approach. If you and your spouse can agree on major terms, pursuing an uncontested divorce or mediation can save tens of thousands of dollars compared to contested litigation.
• Be realistic about outcomes. Prolonging a case to achieve a marginally better result often costs more in legal fees than the improvement is worth. An experienced attorney can help you evaluate when a settlement is fair.
• Ask about billing structures. Some attorneys offer flat fees for uncontested cases or specific phases of a contested case. Understanding the billing arrangement upfront helps you plan your budget.

Key Takeaway: Organizing documents, communicating efficiently, considering mediation, and asking about billing structures are practical ways to keep divorce costs under control.

Get Legal Guidance From an Experienced Manhattan Divorce Lawyer

Every divorce case has different financial considerations depending on the issues involved. Whether your divorce is straightforward or involves assets, custody disputes, or support calculations, knowing what to expect helps you make informed decisions about your future.

Manhattan divorce attorney Richard Roman Shum has over 15 years of experience helping clients through contested and uncontested divorces throughout Manhattan and New York. At the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., our divorce lawyers handle property division, child custody, spousal maintenance, and all aspects of the divorce process. 

Call the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. at (646) 259-3416 for a free consultation. Our Manhattan office serves families throughout New York City, including the Lower East Side, Midtown, the Upper West Side, and surrounding neighborhoods. 

from Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. https://www.romanshum.com/how-much-does-divorce-cost-manhattan/