Ordered that the cross appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the defendant is not aggrieved by the portion of the order cross-appealed from ( see, CPLR 5511); and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The parties were married on March 21, 1979, after entering into a prenuptial agreement in connection with which each was represented by independent counsel. The instant action in which the wife seeks, inter alia, to set aside the agreement on the grounds of duress and overreaching was commenced in 1993.
The Supreme Court properly determined that so much of the plaintiff wife's first cause of action which was to rescind the provisions of the prenuptial agreement which allocated property is barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations ( see, CPLR 213; Scheuer v Scheuer, 308 NY 447; Dunning v Dunning, 300 NY 341; Pacchiana v Pacchiana, 94 AD2d 721) and it properly dismissed, as academic, the remaining branches of the defendant husband's motion ( see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707; Matter of Amnesty Am. v Jackson, 202 AD2d 416).