In New York, after 33 years of marriage, couple divorced in 2006. They agreed to split their considerable wealth equally. She got the apartment; he got the house.

More than two years later, W received a voicemail message that stunned her: H wanted to revise their settlement. W refused, and H sued.

When the couple split their assets evenly, the largest chunk of money was invested with Mr. Madoff. H kept much of his funds in the Madoff account, which was held in his name. W, who said she had no interest in investing with Madoff, received her settlement proceeds in cash.

Shortly after Madoff admitted wrongdoing in December 2008, H, filed court papers to drastically alter the terms of his divorce settlement.

W, he argued in the lawsuit, should be required to turn over millions of dollars that she had received in their settlement to make up for the substantial losses he had sustained in the fraud. H began arguing that he and W were mistaken about the existence of the account. “There was in fact no account and no securities or other assets,”

A ruling in this case would only have a direct effect on New York’s laws, but a decision by the influential court could influence how judges interpret laws in other states.

Sidney Turner

www.SidneyTurnerllc.com