context: Finally, the judge concluded that under governing law in the Lebanese Jaafarite Court, the mother would not have been awarded custody of the sons after the age of two had she sought custody in that court. These subsidiary and ultimate findings and rulings support a determination that the mother's agreement to give guardianship of the children to the father was obtained under duress and was thus unenforceable.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.identifier: 278 N.J. Super. 218, 222
citation_a.parenthetical: one-sided settlement agreement obtained in exchange for granting wife Jewish divorce was unenforceable as a product of duress
citation_a.sentence: Cf. Segal v. Segal, 278 N.J. Super. 218, 222 (1994) (one-sided settlement agreement obtained in exchange for granting wife Jewish divorce was unenforceable as a product of duress); Golding v. Golding, 176 A.D.2d 20, 21-24 (N.Y. 1992) (wife compelled to enter into agreement by husband’s invocation of his power to refuse to give her a Jewish divorce).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 448 Mass. 629, 637
citation_b.parenthetical: "It is well established that a contract entered into under duress is voidable"
citation_b.sentence: See Cabot Corp. v. AVX Corp., 448 Mass. 629, 637 (2007) (“It is well established that a contract entered into under duress is voidable”). To avoid enforcement of a contract, a contracting party may prevail on a theory of duress if she demonstrates “(1) that one side involuntarily accepted the terms of another; (2) that circumstances permitted no other alternative; and (3) that said circumstances were the result of coercive acts of the opposite party.”