Get refusal divorce attorney New York

A civil judgment of divorce ends a marriage as far as the State of New York is concerned. Where a religious barrier to remarriage remains, the civil judgment does not remove it. New York addresses that gap through N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law 253, which requires a party seeking a divorce to take the steps within their power to remove barriers to the other party’s remarriage, and through the related provision permitting a court to consider the effect of a barrier when deciding the financial terms. Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C. handles these matters in New York. Call (888) 437-7747.

On this page

What the Statute Requires

DRL 253 operates through sworn statements filed in the civil action. A plaintiff seeking a divorce where the marriage was solemnized by a religious officiant must file a statement that they have taken, or will take, all steps within their power to remove any barrier to the defendant’s remarriage. The court will not enter final judgment without it. The statute is drafted in terms of the party’s own power, which keeps the civil court out of any determination about religious doctrine. It never requires a court to decide what a religious tribunal should do.

Why the Mechanism Is Indirect

A civil court cannot order a person to perform a religious act, and the statute is written to avoid asking one to. What it does instead is condition the relief the moving party wants on the sworn statement, and permit the financial factors to reflect a refusal. The distinction sounds technical and is the reason the framework has survived. Litigants sometimes arrive expecting a court order directing a spouse to appear before a religious tribunal. That is not what the statute provides, and asking for it invites a dismissal that costs time.

Financial Consequences of a Refusal

The Domestic Relations Law permits the court to consider the effect of a barrier to remarriage among the factors governing equitable distribution and maintenance. That is a real consequence rather than a symbolic one, because those factors drive the numbers. How much weight it carries depends on the record and on the judge. Building the record means documenting what was requested, when, and what response was given, in writing, contemporaneously. A history assembled after the fact is markedly less persuasive than a contemporaneous exchange.

Timing and Leverage

Refusal is usually deployed at the point of maximum pressure, which is after the financial terms are substantially agreed and the other party has little left to concede. Raising the issue at the outset changes that dynamic. Where cooperation is addressed in the pleadings and in the first settlement proposal, the party contemplating a refusal has to take a position while the rest of the case is still open. Waiting until the end and hoping for goodwill is the approach that most reliably fails.

Drafting Cooperation Into the Agreement

A settlement agreement can address cooperation directly, and how the clause is written determines whether it is worth anything. Provisions framed as an obligation to appear before a tribunal and to abide by its procedures are ordinarily more durable than provisions framed as compelling a religious outcome, which raise enforceability problems. Some agreements attach a financial consequence to non-cooperation. Whether such a term is enforceable is fact-specific and depends heavily on the drafting, which is a reason to treat this clause as a negotiated term rather than boilerplate.

Where the Civil Case and the Religious Process Diverge

The two processes run on separate tracks and separate timetables. A religious tribunal has its own procedures and its own requirements, and the civil court neither supervises nor accelerates them. Parties frequently assume that a civil judgment will resolve the religious question automatically, and discover otherwise only when they attempt to remarry. Understanding at the beginning that two processes must each be completed avoids a common and painful surprise at the end.

What to Preserve From the Start

The useful evidence in these matters is documentary and it accumulates early. Correspondence requesting cooperation, records of any tribunal proceeding commenced, and any written response or refusal all matter later, both to the barrier-removal requirement and to the financial factors. Because the civil case may move faster than the religious process, preserving that record from the outset is what allows the issue to be raised effectively while the financial terms are still open for negotiation.

Custody and Support Are Decided Independently

A refusal to cooperate on the religious question does not alter how custody is determined. Custody is decided on the best interests of the child, and a court will not treat a religious dispute between the parents as a proxy for parental fitness. The same holds for child support, which is calculated under the statutory framework regardless of the religious posture of either party. Parties occasionally attempt to link the issues in negotiation, offering movement on parenting time in exchange for cooperation. That approach tends to be counterproductive, because a court reviewing an agreement will look closely at any arrangement that appears to trade a child’s interests for an unrelated concession.

What the Court Will Not Decide

A civil court will not interpret religious law, will not evaluate whether a tribunal acted correctly, and will not resolve a disagreement between religious authorities. Requests framed that way are outside what the court can do and consume time without advancing the case. What the court can address is concrete and narrow: whether the statutory statement has been filed, and whether the effect of a barrier should influence the financial factors. Framing an application within those boundaries is what makes it viable, and it is the difference between an argument the court can act on and one it must decline.

Recognition of a Foreign Religious Divorce

Where a religious divorce was obtained abroad, its effect in New York depends on the civil law of the place it was granted and on whether that jurisdiction had a basis to act, not on the religious character of the proceeding. A religious decree issued in a country that does not treat it as dissolving the civil marriage does not end the marriage in New York either. Parties sometimes arrive believing they are already divorced and learn otherwise when they attempt to remarry or when a subsequent estate question arises. Anyone in that position should have the foreign documentation reviewed before assuming the civil marriage has ended.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a New York court order my spouse to give a get?

A civil court does not order the religious act itself. DRL 253 requires a sworn statement from a party seeking a divorce that they have removed or will remove barriers within their power, and a refusal may be weighed among the financial factors.

Does the civil divorce resolve the religious status?

No. The two are separate. A civil judgment ends the marriage under state law; the religious barrier is addressed through the religious process, with the civil statute operating alongside it.

Does refusal affect the money?

It can. The Domestic Relations Law permits the court to consider the effect of a barrier to remarriage when deciding equitable distribution and maintenance. The weight depends on the record and on the judge.

When should the issue be raised?

At the outset, in the pleadings and in the first settlement proposal. Leverage shifts once the financial terms are resolved, and raising it late is the pattern that most often fails.

Can cooperation be written into a settlement?

Yes, and the drafting matters. Clauses framed as an obligation to participate in a process are generally more durable than clauses that read as compelling a religious result, which raise enforceability questions.

What should be documented?

Every request for cooperation and every response, in writing and at the time. A contemporaneous record is substantially more persuasive than a history reconstructed later.

About Mr. Sris

Mr. Sris, Owner and Founder of Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C., has practiced since 1997. He is a former prosecutor, and that experience shapes how he reads the other side’s file and builds a record for the court. He is admitted in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York. His background at George Mason University in accounting and information systems applies to complex financial and technology-related cases, which is where a contested matrimonial matter often turns. Mr. Sris and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys handle New York matters together, with the division of work set at the start of the engagement.

Speak With Mr. Sris

Request a consultation. Reach our location at (888) 437-7747. Bring what you already have: tax returns, account statements, any agreement signed before or during the marriage, and a short written timeline. That material lets the first conversation move past intake and into the questions that decide your case.

Last updated: August 25, 2026

This page provides general information about New York family law and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Case results depend on a variety of factors unique to each case. Results may vary.

Attorney Advertising. Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C., principal office: 4008 Williamsburg Court, Fairfax, VA 22032. By appointment. Call (888) 437-7747 to schedule.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.