Adultery in New York - Does Cheating Affect Alimony?

It is not uncommon for spouses to get divorced after one or both spouses has an affair. Cheating can cause grief and anger in a marital relationship, and it is not uncommon for spouses to try and punish their spouses through the legal process. Divorce proceedings can be messy, and in cases where adultery has occurred, spouses will often expect higher financial support awards from the court.

As many spouses know, cheating often has consequences. Aside from the effect of cheating on the marriage itself, cheating may affect the divorce process and any alimony awards received by the spouses. Each state varies on how exactly adultery will affect an alimony award, and so this article is intended to clarify that issue for the state of New York.

The Nature of Divorce in New York

New York law contains seven reasons why couples are allowed to seek a divorce. Until recently, spouses could only seek a divorce for fault reasons. However, even with the recent inclusion of no-fault divorce in New York law, four of New York’s grounds for divorce are fault grounds, including adultery.1 Before discussing whether adultery or cheating would affect an award of alimony or spousal support, the nature of divorce in New York must be examined.

TIP: Get free family law consultation about divorce and alimony.

About New York Alimony Rules

New York’s alimony laws are relatively lengthy and complex.2 This is in large part because the alimony laws are extremely specific and provide courts substantial guidance in how to award alimony. That said, however, the courts do have some discretion in the amount of alimony that is awarded.

Alimony in New York is tied to the standard of fairness. New York courts are not allowed to award any alimony that they believe is unfair. A series of factors are used to help determine the appropriate amount of the award.3 Among the most important of those factors are:

  • The age and health of the parties;
  • Each spouse’s earning capacity;
  • Each party’s assets;
  • The standard of living established during the marriage; and
  • Other factors which the court may find relevant.

The Effect of Adultery and Other For-Cause Grounds for Divorce on Alimony

New York law used to explicitly allow courts to consider fault when making alimony determinations; however, the current alimony law does not explicitly include fault. As a result, it is unclear whether the New York legislature intends fault to be considered under the current law. That said, New York courts have used the statute’s catch-all provision to continue to consider fault in alimony determinations. Where courts do consider marital fault, however, the fault so egregious or uncivilized as to be considered a blatant disregard of the marital relationship.4 In most cases, where courts do consider fault in alimony determinations, it is a result of extreme violence or spousal abuse, not alimony.5 In fact, New York Courts have explicitly held that alimony is generally not a severe enough instance of conduct to result in an award of alimony.6

The Verdict:

While courts may consider fault in making alimony determinations, the fault must generally be of some extreme nature. Many New York courts have held that under the modern alimony rules, adultery is not severe enough to override the financial concerns at play in making alimony determinations. As a result, courts will not base any award of alimony on either spouses’ adultery.

If your spouse has been cheating on you and you plan to sue for divorce, you should consider contacting a local divorce attorney for assistance. Divorces involving adultery claims tend to be very messy lawsuits and will be very difficult to litigate on your own. Your rights can be best protected by proactively protecting your ability to succeed in your divorce litigation.

Note: This is not legal advice. Please consult a lawyer for your specific situation.

Resources:

  1. NY CLS Dom Rel § 170.
  2. NY CLS Dom Rel § 236.
  3. Id. at (6)(e)(1).
  4. Blickstein v. Blickstein, 99 A.D.2d 287, 294, 472 N.Y.S.2d 110 (2d Dep’t 1984).
  5. SeeHoward S. v. Lillian S., 14 N.Y.3d 431, 902 N.Y.S.2d 17, 928 N.E.2d 399 (2010).
  6. See Kellerman v. Kellerman, 187 A.D.2d 906, 590 N.Y.S.2d 570 (3d Dep’t 1992); Weilert v. Weilert, 167 A.D.2d 463, 562 N.Y.S.2d 139 (2d Dep’t 1990); Lestrange v. Lestrange, 148 A.D.2d 587, 539 N.Y.S.2d 53 (2d Dep’t 1989); Wilson v. Wilson, 101 A.D.2d 536, 476 N.Y.S.2d 120 (1st Dep’t 1984).