AUYEUNG v. YINYIN MUI

The wife failed to rebut the presumption that all property acquired by either spouse during the marriage is marital property ( see DeJesus v DeJesus, 90 NY2d 643, 648; see also Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [5] [d] [7]). As a result, the referee properly found that the parties should equally divide the proceeds of the house sale ( see Smith v Smith, 8 AD3d 728; see also McManus v McManus, 298 AD2d 189; Fields v Fields, 15 NY3d 158, 165-166, affg 65 AD3d 297).

We find no basis to disturb the referee's credibility determinations, and thus, find no basis to disturb the referee's finding on fault ( see Hale v Hale, 16 AD3d 231, 233).

We have considered the wife's remaining contentions and find that they are either unpreserved or without merit.