| Tung Auyeung v Yinyin Mui |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 01702 [82 AD3d 477] |
| March 8, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Tung Auyeung, Respondent, v Yinyin Mui,Appellant. |
—[*1] Law Offices of Wendy Tso, P.C., New York (Wendy Tso of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Matthew F. Cooper, J.), entered December11, 2009, awarding plaintiff a divorce and distributing the marital assets, and bringing up forreview an order of the same court (Harold B. Beeler, J.), entered on or about December 29, 2008,which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, confirmed a referee's report which,among other things, (1) found that the two-family house purchased during the marriage was partof the marital assets; (2) barred the admission of a separation agreement; (3) failed to addresscharges of bigamy and cruel and inhuman treatment by plaintiff husband; (4) failed to determinewhether defendant wife had properly received service of the summons and complaint,unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The wife failed to rebut the presumption that all property acquired by either spouse duringthe 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 refereeproperly 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]; Fields v Fields, 15 NY3d 158,165-166 [2010], affg 65 AD3d 297 [2009]).
We find no basis to disturb the referee's credibility determinations, and thus, find no basis[*2]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 eitherunpreserved or without merit. Concur—Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Freedman andManzanet-Daniels, JJ.