New York divorce laws have evolved significantly, and key legal minds have played a role in shaping how adultery is treated in divorce proceedings. While adultery is often seen as a personal issue, it has legal consequences in New York divorces—particularly in contested cases involving spousal support, child custody, and asset division.  

Here are some trailblazers—judges, attorneys, and legal organizations—who have influenced New York’s approach to adultery in divorce law.  

1. Judges Who Have Shaped New York Divorce Law on Adultery

 Judge Judith Kaye (Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, 1993–2008)  

 Led major reforms in New York divorce laws, paving the way for nofault divorce in 2010.  

 Prior to nofault, adultery was one of the few legal grounds for divorce in New York, often leading to long and contentious trials.  

 Advocated for modernizing divorce law to reflect contemporary family dynamics.  

 Judge Jeffrey Sunshine (Supervising Judge for Matrimonial Matters, NYC Supreme Court)  

 Has presided over highprofile New York divorce cases involving allegations of adultery.  

 Issued rulings clarifying how adultery affects spousal support and marital property division in modern cases.  

 Recognized for balancing faultbased claims with the principles of equitable distribution.  

2. Legal Scholars and Attorneys Influencing New York’s Adultery Divorce Laws

 Raoul Felder – “The Divorce Lawyer to the Stars”  

 Represented highprofile clients in New York divorce cases, including those involving New York Divorce Laws Adultery disputes.  

 Known for his aggressive legal tactics in cases where infidelity played a role in negotiations.  

 His cases often set precedents for how adultery influences alimony and settlements in highnetworth divorces.  

 Eleanor Alter – Renowned Matrimonial Attorney  

 Represented celebrities and highprofile individuals in complex divorce cases.  

 Helped shape the legal landscape for how infidelity is considered in financial settlements.  

 Her work emphasized that adultery alone does not guarantee a financial advantage in divorce unless it impacts marital assets.  

3. The New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) – Family Law Section provides guidelines and updates on adultery in modern divorce cases, supports continuing legal education programs, and has helped guide the transition from faultbased divorce to nofault divorce. The Sanctuary for Families – Advocates for Survivors of Domestic Abuse works with clients whose spouses committed adultery alongside financial or emotional abuse, providing legal support for spouses seeking restraining orders and financial protections when adultery overlaps with coercion or manipulation.

4. Pivotal Cases That Changed How Adultery Affects Divorce in New York

 Hessen v. Hessen (1975) – Adultery Must Be Proven with Clear Evidence  

 New York courts ruled that circumstantial evidence is insufficient to prove adultery.  

 This case made it harder for spouses to win divorce settlements based on infidelity alone.  

 Howard S. v. Lillian S. (2013) – Adultery and Spousal Support  

 A husband’s claim that his wife’s adultery should bar her from alimony was denied.  

 Reinforced the idea that spousal support is based on financial need, not marital fault.  

 Anonymous v. Anonymous (2018) – Adultery and Prenuptial Agreements  

 A prenuptial agreement included an infidelity clause that led to a reduced settlement for the cheating spouse.  

 Courts upheld the prenup, showing that adultery clauses can be enforceable in certain cases.  

5. The Shift from FaultBased to NoFault Divorce (2010)

Before 2010, New York required a legal ground for New York Divorce Law Adultery, and adultery was a primary reason spouses used to file. The shift to nofault divorce—thanks to legal advocates and lawmakers—reduced the emphasis on adultery. However, adultery can still be relevant when:  

 It involves wasting marital assets (e.g., spending money on an affair).  

 It negatively affects child custody (e.g., exposing children to inappropriate situations).  

 It breaches a prenuptial agreement that includes an infidelity clause.  

 Conclusion