SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

The title of the article is "LI judges's 'groundbreaking' divorce case ruling makes giving partner STD a form of domestic violence in NY"

Anyway, the article states that the judge awarded the wife 100% of the marital assets because her husband knowingly gave her a life altering form of STD.

The WH in question had a lot of other negative qualities, but among them he was a serial cheater who continued to sleep with his wife even after knowing he had an STD, which he transferred to her. She had to have surgery, but will live with the consequences for the rest of her life. I believe she will always have to take medication for it.

The judge ruled that because of his actions and the consequences, it is a form of Domestic Violence. This information was used by the judge to determine what to award the wife. In this case, everything.

The ruling is "huge," said lawyer Byron Divins, whose firm represented the wife.

"No court has ever really, as far as I’m aware, made [sexually transmitted diseases] the center of their decision," said Divins, of the Williston Park-based Capetola & Divins. The decision is based on a 2020 amendment to New York law which lets courts weigh domestic violence when determining how to split up marital assets.

The judge’s ruling is going to make cheating spouses "a little more careful" when they mess around, said matrimonial attorney Ankit Kapoor, whose office is based in Times Square.

I'm not so sure about this statement, since people who cheat never think about the consequences. If anything, I feel this kind of thing might make it a bit more dangerous for the unsuspecting BS.

What do you guys think about this development?

I think it’s fair and great.
The KEY issue is that he KNOWINGLY gave her the disease. To me, that’s like KNOWINGLY point a revolver at her head and pull the trigger in some belief that only one or two of the chambers are loaded.
The article mentions this as one of the "profound acts of domestic violence", so the STD was not the sole reason for the heavy-handed judgement.
This is the kind of guy that I hope rot in hell.

seems fair enough in the context of fault-based divorce. Knowingly giving someone an STD is a criminal offense in some cases.

Good there should be some kind of payback for this and should be a criminal offense. My xWS unknowingly gave me 2 STDs but knowingly slept with women without a condom while married thank god they were curable STDs. Glad I gave my xWS the boot!

I think it’s a great step in the right direction.
I don’t know if the 100% asset allocation is going to
Hold up or not though. Hell I don’t even know if someone can appeal a judges decision in a divorce or not.

the 100% award applies to "marital assets that are subject to equitable division" according to the article "STI Transmission & Divorce: A Form of Domestic Violence" so sounds like not necessarily all the assets. The article also mentions that the husband was/is serving a prison sentence, but it doesn't say for what crime.

The WS was described as "a violent drug abuser with a long rap sheet," including persistent death threats, pulling a gun on his wife and child in the middle of a hospital, and possession of multiple illegal weapons. Their assets were also minimal. I doubt we can extrapolate the inequitable distribution in this scenario to a straightforward divorce case.

The article also mentions that in NY, an offender can be prosecuted criminally for knowingly transmitting an STD, though there's no record of that being pursued in this case.

The court did make a finding specific to the STD transmission. So while it may not support a specific award in a future case without the other acts, what it does is set a precedent that knowing STD transmission from an extramarital affair counts as DV for the purposes of the equitable division statute.

Whether the transmission was prosecuted criminally is not determinative (although it could be used in efforts to strengthen one's case in the divorce court). Different courts, different statutory basis, and likely different standard of proof.

Here is a quotation from the court's ruling:

"And the husband, after engaging [i]n an extramarital affair, thereafter having unprotected sexual intercourse with the wife, constitutes the appropriate degree of recklessness to conclude that the husband committed reckless endangerment. The court finds that the risk created by the husband's conduct was foreseeable, namely, that having unprotected sexual intercourse with someone not his spouse carried with it the risk of transmission of an STI and the court concludes that the husband’s conduct created a risk of physical injury, namely, the wife's excruciating pain and the cancer cells which developed. Lastly, the husband's unprotected sexual intercourse with someone not his spouse was a gross deviation from the standard of conduct of a married person"

I have no issues with it, given the severity of the STD. I'd like to see it expanded to verbal abuse.

Such an interesting decision that makes a lot of sense. When I found out the STI that caused our daughter to be delivered prematurely and additional health issues for me that persisted——-I felt abused and assaulted and was completely in shock. I was so mean to my doctor because of course my husband would never have done that. I was in complete denial but it felt like abuse once I understood what had happened.

It’s a good step but I wonder how they will prove "knowingly", especially with the HPV virus (which I got cervical cancer from). Estimates are that 40+ person of adults unknowingly carry the HPV virus and up to 80% will contract it at some time. It can be deadly if it’s one of the strains that causes cancer (not all strains do), but so common it is rarely even tested for. Herpes is a different story (and my XWS had it but I never contracted it in 25 years). Herpes IS tested for and has visible symptoms (when symptomatic). I like the direction this is going, but proving it will be hard.

Cynical me would want to get full panel STD testing annually even when married just in case…

Interesting story - thanks for sharing.

What I was most surprised of during my years as a cop was the prevalence of domestic violence.
I am 100% of the conviction that proven domestic violence – as in police reports, ER reports, witness statements etc should impact divorce. It could fast-pace it, give the victim precedence in residence, ease a restraining order, force/assume discovery and eventually impact distribution of assets/debts.
I’m not talking a black eye here, but rather long-term documented and/or immensely serious battery.

I also think there should be a semi-automatic judicial process for DV reports, where after 1-2 incidents the abuser is forced into some program or face prison time. Third strike = regular drug/alcohol tests, anger-management…

Regarding STD’s… I think the key there is that the man KNEW he had cauliflower-dick or whatever. Like possibly a medical confirmation that he withheld from his wife.

I'm old enough to remember the HIV/AIDS epidemic and the lawsuits around knowingly passing the disease. Several states have laws penalizing that. Maybe they are assault instead of domestic violence. I think some of them include knowingly exposing a person to any communicative disease whether the person catches it or not. They don't have anything to do with marriage though. One early case, maybe Rock Hudson's partner, involved money and a civil suit I think?

I don't feel so great about including 100% of marital assets to be honest. The definition is: "Marital assets, also called marital property, encompass nearly everything of value accumulated by either spouse from the date of marriage until a legally recognized separation or divorce." With that definition, that would be essentially 100% of everything my spouse and I own. I honestly could not see leaving my spouse penniless at this point in life. Just my opinion. Maybe this person had plenty of other assets.

I assume proof includes showing that the person has a record of a known medical diagnosis that they did not disclose. I also don't know about herpes. I have had fever blisters since I was a child. I've learned that could be herpes I or II. It's never been tested. I had a partner who had a sore on his penis that was tested to be herpes I. I mean, yeah, I absolutely could have given that to him through oral sex. I've never seen a sore, but I could have herpes I on my genitals. I had a roommate in college that had a small open sore on her forehead. Then it became a herpes sore after she was out at a music venue and a person spit beer on her. A week or so later she developed genital sores. The university clinic told her she probably passed it on herself from touching her forehead. I don't know.

[This message edited by KitchenDepth5551 at 4:36 PM, Friday, April 10th]

This decision does not imply that you or any other couple could have a 100%-0% equitable division, unless you have done the laundry list of horrible things that husband did (keep in mind the divorce was finalized while he is serving a significant prison sentence). Equitable division has its own case law and statutory language.

torso1500,

Yes. Thank you. I clearly don't know anything about the law, whether criminal or civil. I was referring to this in the original post:

the article states that the judge awarded the wife 100% of the marital assets because her husband knowingly gave her a life altering form of STD

In terms of him being in jail, I assumed it was serving time for the domestic violence.

KD, that quote is fornlau's summarization. It's not exactly accurate if you read the article.

The husband is in prison for other crimes. The DV referred to in the divorce is the STI transmission itself.

sorry to edit again: there are other DV incidents testified to in the case as well. The husband also dissipated marital funds towards his drug use. The "new" part of the decision is that the STI transmission is also considered DV for purposes of equitable division. The STI led to formation and necessary removal of precancerous cells, along with pain and suffering of the infection symptoms themselves. This all weighed toward the 100% award, it's not cheating STI = no marital assets.

[This message edited by torso1500 at 6:30 PM, Friday, April 10th]