New York – A 49-year-old New York man says he is hopeful his marital dispute with his first wife will help reform the state’s current divorce laws.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
Matthew Gerber and his second wife, Mari, are hopeful Gerber’s ongoing legal dispute with his first wife, Ingrid, will shed light on possible problems in New York’s divorce laws.
Gerber’s divorce from his first wife was overturned after Ingrid, 54, won a successful appeal of the divorce and effectively made the former couple legally married once again. The appeal also voided Gerber’s second marriage.
New York is the only U.S. state without a so-called no-fault law.
“I was unhappy. My marriage was broken,” Gerber said of his first union, which lasted nine years.
But misery or incompatibility alone are not grounds for divorce in New York state. Unless a couple agrees to separate for a year, it takes real mudslinging.
Gerber, 49, would not discuss his divorce, but lawyers said he cited less-than-horrendous reasons for the split — like bickering over what color to paint a room and his wife’s refusal to hold hands in public.
“She was constantly criticizing his decisions, and it was getting under his skin,” said his former lawyer, Peter Bloom. “It was all nonsense, but it got to the point where he couldn’t deal with it anymore.”
In a public opinion, the appellate judges said Matthew’s testimony that Ingrid “made him feel . . . agitated, annoyed and bothered” wasn’t enough. They found “no evidence that her conduct created any threat to his health or safety.”
“It was a big shock,” Matthew said.
The ruling in effect voided his second marriage. Now he can’t claim Maria as a dependant. They can’t jointly file tax returns. Their twins were born in a legal limbo.
In a pleading letter to legislators, the couple say they’ve spent a bundle on lawyers but his first wife “refuses to negotiate.” Ingrid, a corporate finance specialist who lives in Brooklyn, earns more than Matthew and had no kids with him.
Sondra Miller, a retired judge who chaired a state committee on divorce reform, said no statistics exist but a “significant number” of divorces are denied by judges statewide who find insufficient grounds. “I am convinced the families of New York suffer grievous harm for the lack of a no-fault law,” Miller said.
He’s been seperated from his 1st wife now for over a year, let him just file for a new divorce. Please don’t tell me that NY state requires both parties to agree to a seperation.
Well now they have been separated for a year it would seem, so why can’t he file for a new divorce? If she earns more maybe she should pay him alimony!
In NY State you only get granted a divorce if one prove their spouse either had an affair, been cruel to them or withheld sex for a year.
why cant you divorce your wife for no reason at all? why do you have to give any reasons?
So NY law is like the halacha: unless there is mutual consent, you need adequate grounds for a divorce. You can’t impose a divorce on your spouse just because you feel like it. If your spouse has not given you adequate grounds for a forced divorce, then you have no choice but to persuade him/her to consent, and you have to do whatever it takes, i.e. in most cases pay whatever s/he wants. So let people stop complaining about the halacha.
if he was living with his new wife, isnt he legally considered being unfaithful to his first wife???? I am confused
Because the divorce laws in NY are specific to six reasons. Most try to make thier situation fit:
1) The cruel and inhuman treatment of the plaintiff by the defendant such that the conduct of the defendant so endangers the physical or mental well being of the plaintiff as renders it unsafe or improper for the plaintiff to cohabit with the defendant.
(2) The abandonment of the plaintiff by the defendant for a period of one or more years.
(3) The confinement of the defendant in prison for a period of three or more consecutive years after the marriage of plaintiff and defendant.
(4) The commission of an act of adultery, provided that adultery for the purposes of articles ten, eleven, and eleven-A of this chapter, is hereby defined as the commission of an act of sexual intercourse, oral sexual conduct or anal sexual conduct, voluntarily performed by the defendant, with a person other than the plaintiff after the marriage of plaintiff and defendant. Oral sexual conduct and anal sexual conduct include, but are not limited to, sexual conduct as defined in subdivision two of section 130.00 and subdivision three of section 130.20 of the penal law.
(5) The husband and wife have lived apart pursuant to a decree or judgment of separation for a period of one or more years after the granting of such decree or judgment, and satisfactory proof has been submitted by the plaintiff that he or she has substantially performed all the terms and conditions of such decree or judgment.
(6) The husband and wife have lived separate and apart pursuant to a written agreement of separation, subscribed by the parties thereto and acknowledged or proved in the form required to entitle a deed to be recorded, for a period of one or more years after the execution of such agreement and satisfactory proof has been submitted by the plaintiff that he or she has substantially performed all the terms and conditions of such agreement. Such agreement shall be filed in the office of the clerk of the county wherein either party resides. In lieu of filing such agreement, either party to such agreement may file a memorandum of such agreement, which memorandum shall be similarly subscribed and acknowledged or proved as was the agreement of separation and shall contain the following information: (a) the names and addresses of each of the parties, (b) the date of marriage of the parties, (c) the date of the agreement of separation and (d) the date of this subscription and acknowledgment or proof of such agreement of separation.
It’s much easier to explain why to divorce, than explaining the reason Why being married
The argument is not new, it’s over 2000 year. It’s a dispute between shamy and hillel, if you need an excuse to divorce.
“if he was living with his new wife, isnt he legally considered being unfaithful to his first wife???? I am confused”
If he commits acts of adultery then SHE can obtain a divorce and in this case she doesnt want one. In order for him to sue for divorce she must commit the adulterous act.
Halacha should not apply to the State of NY unless a majority of the people are Jewish, which is clearly not the case. The people in question are not Jewish and they and their children should not be suffering.