Gardella v. Remizov

When spouses Slavina Gardella (plaintiff) and Emil Remizov (defendant) separated in 2010, they executed a separation agreement. At the time, Gardella was a neurosurgeon earning $600,000 per year, and Remizov, who had a medical condition limiting his earning capacity, was a wine salesman earning $40,000 per year. The separation agreement stated that Remizov did not have an ownership interest in any property acquired during the marriage, including six parcels of real property, Gardella’s interest in her medical practice, and Gardella’s bank and investment accounts. The agreement also stated that Remizov waived any right to spousal maintenance, or periodic support payments. Provisions regarding the agreement’s execution stated that each spouse entered the agreement voluntarily without coercion, pressure, or undue influence, that each spouse had an opportunity to be represented by council or had waived counsel, and that each spouse had full awareness of the other’s assets or had waived disclosure. Remizov, who executed the agreement without counsel, also signed an independent affidavit attesting that he had fully read the agreement, had executed it voluntarily, and had opted not to seek legal representation. A year after the agreement’s execution, Gardella filed for divorce and sought to have the separation agreement incorporated in the divorce degree. Remizov filed a counterclaim, arguing that the separation agreement should be vacated because it was unconscionable and resulted from fraud, duress, and overreaching. He also presented evidence that Gardella sold certain investments prior to the agreement’s execution and failed to list the proceeds among her assets. The trial court granted summary judgment in Gardella’s favor, granting the divorce and incorporating the settlement agreement into the divorce decree. Remizov appealed.