In Cordova v. Cordova, (2d Dep’t 2009), the Supreme Court held the husband in contempt for his willful failure to comply with a stipulation of settlement because he knew at the time of entering into the stipulation that he had misrepresented the extent of his equity share in the marital residence.

The parties stipulated that the husband would retain the marital residence and that he would pay the wife $144,000 for her share of equity in the property.  The property had been owned by the husband and his two sisters.  However, the husband represented to the wife and the Court that the marital property was titled to him, purchased with marital funds.  Despite the stipulation, the husband did not refinance the property to buy out the wife’s share of equity.  He instead transferred the property to his two sisters by quitclaim deed. 

The wife moved for an order of contempt after failing to receive the $144,000 payment.  The husband commenced an action to vacate or modify the stipulation on the ground of mutual mistake, claiming that the recital in the stipulation that he was the titled owner of the marital residence was incorrect, as was the assertion that the property had been purchased with marital funds. 

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s holding of contempt because the former husband acknowledged that he knew when he signed the stipulation that his characterization of the ownership of the property was incorrect and he had no intention of complying with his obligation under the agreement.