N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Domestic Relations / ARTICLE Provisions Applicable to More Than One Type of Matrimonial Action
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 243 (2026)

Security for payments by defendant in action for divorce, separation or annulment; sequestration

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 243. Security for payments by defendant in action for divorce,
separation or annulment; sequestration. Where a judgment rendered or an
order made in an action in this state for divorce, separation or
annulment, or for a declaration of nullity of a void marriage, or a
judgment rendered in another state for divorce upon any of the grounds
provided in section one hundred seventy of this chapter, or for
separation or separate support and maintenance for any of the causes
specified in section two hundred, or for relief, however designated,
granted upon grounds which in this state would be grounds for annulment
of marriage or for a declaration of nullity of a void marriage, upon
which an action has been brought in this state and judgment rendered
therein, requires a spouse to provide for the education or maintenance
of any of the children of a marriage, or for the support of his or her
spouse, the court, in its discretion, also may direct the spouse from
whom maintenance or support is sought to give reasonable security, in
such a manner and within such a time as it thinks proper, for the
payment, from time to time, of the sums of money required for that
purpose. If he or she fails to give the security, or to make any payment
required by the terms of such a judgment or order, whether or not
security has been given therefor, or to pay any sum of money for the
support and maintenance of the children or the support and maintenance
of the spouse during the pendency of the action, or for counsel fees and
expenses which he or she is required to pay by a judgment or order, the
court may cause his or her personal property and the rents and profits
of his or her real property to be sequestered, and may appoint a
receiver thereof. The rents and profits and other property so
sequestered may be applied, from time to time, under the direction of
the court, to the payment of any of the sums of money specified in this
section, as justice requires; and if the same shall be insufficient to
pay the sums of money required, the court, on application of the
receiver, may direct the mortgage or sale of such real property by the
receiver, under such terms and conditions as it may prescribe,
sufficient to pay such sums.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: Labow v. Labow, 154 A.D.2d 90 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Labow v. Labow, 154 A.D.2d 90 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990). · cites it 12× “The first of these was an order directing defendant to post security for future alimony payments, in the amount of $1,000,000, pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 243. Plaintiff fears, not unjustifiably, that cessation of the weekly alimony payments of $4,500 is imminent.”
Rose v. Rose, 138 A.D.2d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988). · cites it 7× “), entered June 29, 1987, as denied that branch of her cross motion which was for the appointment of a receiver pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 243, and the sequestration of the defendant husband’s equitable share of the net proceeds from the sale of the parties’ former…”
Beal v. Beal, 196 A.D.2d 471 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). · cites it 3× “), entered November 20, 1991, which, inter alia, directed the sequestration of certain property and assets pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 243, to enforce the terms of the divorce judgment, and *472 (2) from stated portions of an order of the same court, dated March 2,…”
Martin v. Martin, 115 A.D.3d 1315 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 2× “retal paragraph that there shall be an adjustment of child support upon the termination of plaintiffs maintenance obligation and as modified the judgment is affirmed without costs and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, to determine the amount of that…”
Maddaloni v. Maddaloni, 142 A.D.3d 646 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). “trimonial actions, Domestic Relations Law § 245 grants the court authority to punish a party for civil contempt pursuant to Judiciary Law § 756 where the party defaults “in paying any sum of money” required by a judgment or order, “and it appears presumptively, to the…”
El-Dehdan v. El-Dehdan, 114 A.D.3d 4 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). “In an action for a divorce, Domestic Relations Law § 245 grants the court authority to punish a party for civil contempt pursuant to Judiciary Law § 756 where the party defaults “in paying any sum of money” required by a judgment or order, *23 “and it appears presumptively, to…”
Cutroneo v. Cutroneo, 140 A.D.3d 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). “trimonial actions, Domestic Relations Law § 245 grants the court authority to punish a party for civil contempt pursuant to Judiciary Law § 756 where the party defaults “in paying any sum of money” required by a judgment or order, “and it appears presumptively, to the…”
Reback v. Reback, 93 A.D.3d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). “The court did not err in granting that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was to require the defendant to post an undertaking to the extent of directing him to post an undertaking in the sum of $45,000 (see Domestic Relations Law § 243). Dillon, J.”
Parnes v. Parnes, 41 A.D.3d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). “Each of the statutes which plaintiff listed as a basis for her contempt motion require proof that less drastic means of enforcement have been, or would be, ineffectual (see Domestic Relations Law § 245 [referring to Domestic Relations Law §§ 243, 244 and CPLR 5241, 5242]; CPLR…”
McPheeters v. McPheeters, 284 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001). “Because plaintiff refused to provide the court with information about the survivor option on his pension, the court properly ordered plaintiff to obtain a life insurance policy naming defendant as the beneficiary, in order “[t]o provide the [defendant] with some protection in…”
Manno v. Manno, 224 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). “Since there is no evidence of wilful default on the part of the defendant, it was error to award interest on the amount of arrears, which was only established after the November 22, 1993, order. The court erred in sequestering the defendant’s Individual Retirement Account until…”
Snow v. Snow, 209 A.D.2d 399 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994). “The plaintiff wife contends that the defendant husband should be held in contempt pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 245 for failing to make court-ordered pendente lite *401 payments of maintenance and interim attorneys’ fees.”
Show all 61 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.