The applicant wife and respondent husband separated after an 11-year marriage.
The husband's pleadings were struck for non-compliance with disclosure orders.
The court imputed an income of $100,000 to the husband for support purposes, finding him intentionally underemployed and noting the significant financial support he received from his wealthy father.
The court ordered prospective child and spousal support but denied retroactive support due to unexplained delay.
The court interpreted the parties' domestic contract as entitling the wife to one-half of the equity in the matrimonial home, which the husband had purchased solely in his name.
Furthermore, the court stayed a writ of execution obtained by the husband's father against the husband, finding it was an improper attempt to encumber the matrimonial home and defeat the wife's claims.
