Majority
The wife failed to rebut the presumption that all property acquired by either spouse during the marriage is marital property (see DeJesus v DeJesus, 90 NY2d 643 , 648 [1997]; see also Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [5] [d] [7]). As a result, the referee properly found that the parties should equally divide the proceeds of the house sale (see Smith v Smith, 8 AD3d 728 [2004]; see also McManus v McManus, 298 AD2d 189 [2002];
We find no basis to disturb the referee’s credibility determinations, and thus, find no basis to disturb the referee’s finding on fault (see Hale v Hale, 16 AD3d 231 , 233 [2005]).
We have considered the wife’s remaining contentions and find that they are either unpreserved or without merit. Concur— Tom, J.E, Sweeny, Renwick, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Cases cited
- DeJesus v. DeJesus 90 NY2d 643 at 648 p. 477
- Smith v. Smith 8 AD3d 728 p. 477
- Fields v. Fields 15 NY3d 158 at 165-166 p. 478
- Fields v. Fields 65 AD3d 297 p. 478
- Hale v. Hale 16 AD3d 231 at 233 p. 478