The following 15 documents were considered in connection with the notice of motion of Plaintiff, dated July 17, 2025, (hereinafter "Motion Sequence No. 2"), seeking the entry of an Order granting the following relief:

1. Enforcing the parties' divorce agreement, specifically requiring Defendant to complete the mortgage transfer pursuant to the terms of said agreement;

2. Requiring Defendant to reimburse Plaintiff for lost IRS tax refund proceeds in the amount of $14,510, or, in the alternative, to immediately reimburse the United Nations in full for the amount of $14,510, for which Plaintiff is presently held liable due to Defendant's misuse of funds;

3. Restoring the full agreed-upon child support payments and any arrears accrued as a result of Defendant's unilateral reduction in support;

4. Awarding legal fees and other costs associated with this motion; and,

5. And for such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

This contested matrimonial action ^[FN2] was commenced on February 15, 2024, with the Plaintiff's filing of a summons and complaint (hereinafter "Complaint").^[FN3] The Complaint seeks judgment against the Defendant dissolving the marriage between the parties to this action pursuant to New York State Domestic Relations Law § 170(7) asserting that the parties' relationship had irretrievably broken down for a period in excess of six months and requests other ancillary relief.^[FN4]

On March 19, 2024, a proposed judgment of divorce,^[FN5] findings of fact and conclusions of law,^[FN6] and stipulation of settlement ^[FN7] were filed with the Court, along with other related divorce documents.^[FN8] Simultaneously, the parties filed a request for judicial intervention (hereinafter "RJI")^[FN9] as well as a Note of Issue.^[FN10]

On April 24, 2024, the Court so-ordered and filed the judgment of divorce and findings of fact and conclusions of law, among other divorce documents.^[FN11]

On July 17, 2025, the Plaintiff filed Motion Sequence No. 2, requesting the above referenced relief, being made returnable on August 8, 2025.

On August 7, 2025, the parties jointly filed a stipulation of adjournment ^[FN12] of Motion Sequence No. 2 (hereinafter "Stipulation of Adjournment), which sought to extend Defendant's time to serve opposition papers, and the return date of Motion Sequence No. 2.

On August 11, 2025, this Court rejected said stipulation, choosing instead to conform the [*2]Stipulation of Adjournment, and setting forth a new briefing schedule for Motion Sequence No. 2, as follows: (1) August 11, 2025 being the deadline for filing any answering submissions to Motion Sequence No. 2; and, (2) August 25, 2025 being the deadline for filing any reply submissions, which shall also be the adjourned return date of Motion Sequence No. 2, wherein no appearances shall be required.^[FN13]

On August 11, 2025, Defendant filed an affirmation in opposition to Motion Sequence No. 2, with supporting documentation.^[FN14]

No other papers were received or considered with respect to Motion Sequence No. 2.

a. Failure To Provide Signatures on Motion Papers

Pursuant to the Uniform Rules for New York State Trial Courts (hereinafter "NYCRR"), specifically 22 NYCRR §130-1.1a: "(a) Signature. Every pleading, written motion, and other paper, served on another party or filed or submitted to the court shall be signed by an attorney, or by a party if the party is not represented by an attorney, with the name of the attorney or party clearly printed or typed directly below the signature. Absent good cause shown, the court shall strike any unsigned paper if the omission of the signature is not corrected promptly after being called to the attention of the attorney or party."

New York State Technology Law § 304 pertains to the use of electronic signatures:

"1. The electronic facilitator shall establish rules and regulations governing the use of electronic signatures and authentication. The electronic facilitator shall not establish rules or regulations that seek to apportion fault or impose or limit liability relating to the use of electronic signatures.

2. In accordance with this section unless specifically provided otherwise by law, an electronic signature may be used by a person in lieu of a signature affixed by hand. The use of an electronic signature shall have the same validity and effect as the use of a signature affixed by hand."

New York State Technology Law § 302(3) provides, "3. 'Electronic signature' shall mean an electronic sound, symbol, or process, attached to or logically associated with an electronic record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record."

22 NYCRR § 202.5-b provides rules for electronic filing within the New York State Supreme Court:

"(a) Application. (1) On consent, documents may be filed and served by electronic means in Supreme Court in such civil actions and in such counties as shall be authorized by order of the Chief Administrator of the Courts and only to the extent and in the manner provided in this section.

* * *

(ii) NYSCEF shall mean the New York State Courts Electronic Filing System and the [*3]NYSCEF site shall mean the New York State Courts Electronic Filing System website located at www.nycourts.gov/efile;

* * *

(e) Signatures.

(1) Signing of a document. An electronically filed document shall be considered to have been signed by, and shall be binding upon, the person identified as a signatory, if:

(i) it bears the physical signature of such person and is scanned into an electronic format that reproduces such signature; or

(ii) the signatory has electronically affixed the digital image of his or her signature to the document; or

(iii) it is electronically filed under the User ID and password of that person; or

(iv) in a tax certiorari action in which the parties have stipulated to this procedure, it is an initiating document that is electronically filed without the signature of the signatory in a form provided above in this subparagraph, provided that, prior to filing, the document is signed in full in hard copy (which hard copy must be preserved until the conclusion of all proceedings, including appeals, in the case in which it is filed); or

(v) in a small claims assessment review proceeding, it is a petition recorded by the NYSCEF site upon the filing of a text file as provided in subdivision (b)(1) of this section, provided that prior to filing, the document was signed in full in hard copy (which hard copy must be preserved until the conclusion of all proceedings in the matter, including article 78 review and any appeals, and must be made available during the proceeding upon request of the respondent or the court); or

(vi) it otherwise bears the electronic signature of the signatory in a format conforming to such standards and requirements as may hereafter be established by the Chief Administrator."

Initially, we turn to Plaintiff's notice of motion,^[FN15] which upon review was not signed as required by 22 NYCRR § 130-1.1a as Plaintiff's name is merely typed into the document, which does not comply with the directives set forth in 22 NYCRR § 202.5-b, nor does same qualify as an "electronic signature" pursuant to New York State Technology Law § 302(3). Tellingly, this mere typing of Plaintiff's name departs from the Plaintiff's affirmation in support ^[FN16] of Motion Sequence No. 2, which does comply with the applicable rules.

Similarly, in looking at the Defendant's attorney affirmation ^[FN17] submitted in opposition to Motion Sequence No. 2, counsel fails to provide a signature of any kind, whether hand-written or electronic, in violation of both 22 NYCRR § 130-1.1a; and, § 202.5-b, and similarly non-compliant with the definition of electronic signatures pursuant to New York State Technology [*4]Law § 302(3). Instead, counsel appears to only provide the following "/s/"^[FN18] as a substitution for a purported signature, which fails to comply with either of the particular provisions of 22 NYCRR § 130-1.1a; and, § 202.5-b.

Based upon the foregoing, the Court must disregard Plaintiff's notice of motion and Defendant's attorney affirmation entirely.

b. Submitted Affirmations Not in Admissible Form:

Pursuant to New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules (hereinafter "CPLR") § 2106:

"Affirmation of truth of statement. The statement of any person wherever made, subscribed and affirmed by that person to be true under the penalties of perjury, may be used in an action in New York in lieu of and with the same force and effect as an affidavit. Such affirmation shall be in substantially the following form:

"I affirm this ___ day of ______, ____, under the penalties of perjury under the laws of New York, which may include a fine or imprisonment, that the foregoing is true, and I understand that this document may be filed in an action or proceeding in a court of law.

(Signature)"

Plaintiff's affirmation and Defendant's attorney affirmation in opposition, both fail to comply with CPLR § 2106 which requires the following admonition: "I affirm under the penalties of perjury under the laws of New York, which may include a fine or imprisonment, that the foregoing is true, and I understand that this document may be filed in an action or proceeding in a court of law." CPLR § 2106; see also, Calliste v. Williams, 32 Misc 3d 1236(A) (Sup. Ct. Kings Cnty. 2011); Daus v. Cassavaugh, 17 AD3d 837 (3d Dept 2005); Shinn v. Catanzaro, 1 AD3d 195 (1st Dept 2003).

Therefore, both Plaintiff's affirmation in support and Defendant's attorney affirmation in opposition, and all exhibits annexed thereto, are inadmissible based on the parties' joint failure to comply with the CPLR.

Accordingly, the notice of motion and affirmation in support of Plaintiff and affirmation in opposition of Defendant with exhibits, all must be disregarded by the Court, resulting in the denial without prejudice of Motion Sequence No. 2.

Any relief requested and not granted or otherwise addressed herein is denied.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that Motion Sequence No. 2 is denied without prejudice; and it is further

ORDERED that all parties and counsel shall appear for a Status Conference on August 25, 2025 at 2:00 PM (EST), and that the pro se Plaintiff is permitted to appear by virtual conference by Microsoft TEAMS Link, same to be provided by the Court forthwith;

ORDERED that by August 16, 2025, Defendant shall serve a copy of this Order with Notice of Entry on Plaintiff, via NYSCEF filing and e-mail, and file proof of service with the Court on the same day.

The foregoing constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.