| Jones-Bertrand v Bertrand |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 00649 [59 AD3d 391] |
| February 3, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Annetta T. Jones-Bertrand, Respondent, v Jean G.Bertrand, Appellant. |
—[*1] Annetta Jones, suing herein as Annetta T. Jones-Bertrand, respondent pro se.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the former husband appeals, as limited by hisnotice of appeal and brief, from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, KingsCounty (Krauss, J.), dated December 27, 2006, which, upon a decision of the same court datedOctober 16, 2006, made after a nonjury trial, inter alia, awarded the former wife a distributiveaward in the sum of $36,233.45.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In reviewing a determination as to equitable distribution, the trial court's assessment of thecredibility of witnesses is afforded great weight on appeal (see Grasso v Grasso, 47 AD3d 762, 764 [2008]). Moreover, trialcourts are vested with broad discretion in determining distributive awards (see Saleh v Saleh, 40 AD3d 617,618 [2007]; Shifer v Shifer, 27AD3d 549 [2006]; Sebag v Sebag, 294 AD2d 560 [2002]; Oster v Goldberg,226 AD2d 515 [1996]).
Upon consideration of each party's credibility and the particular facts presented in this case,we perceive no basis for disturbing the trial court's determination regarding the equitabledistribution of the parties' property, as the trial court providently exercised its discretion. Inparticular, we agree with the trial court that the former wife's testimony regarding the formerhusband's international wire transfers of marital assets was credible, while the former husband'sexplanation of the wire transfers, which he admitted that he executed, was not credible.[*2]
The parties' remaining contentions either involve matterdehors the record or are without merit. Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ.,concur.