Plaintiff brought a divorce action against defendant, pleading a cause of action for adultery and a cause of action for cruel and inhuman treatment. Defendant counterclaimed for divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment. Plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that defendant has flaunted his alleged extramarital activities, mocked her physical affliction, and urged her to seek a "boyfriend" with the same affliction. Defendant alleges, inter alia, that plaintiff has insulted him by refusing to have sex with him, by seeking to disrupt his business relations, and by indulging in uncontrolled spending.
The motion and cross motion were properly denied. Both parties have pleaded the time of the occurrences with adequate specificity, each having identified either a particular month or a particular period of months. Each has alleged a continuing pattern of cruel and inhuman treatment, within the period prescribed by statute (Domestic Relations Law § 210; Albert v Albert, 44 A.D.2d 895, 896). Each has alleged actions that constitute serious misconduct and not mere incompatibility (Melnick v Melnick, 115 A.D.2d 416, 417).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.