In Pinto v. Pinto (260 AD2d 622) the Appellate Division held that granting the ex-wife one hundred percent of property listed on the parties' statement of net worth in the event the ex-husband did not deliver a Get within a specified time period was not an improvident exercise of discretion. The court referred to Schwartz v. Schwartz, when considering the effect on equitable distribution of a husband's refusal to deliver a Get (see Pinto v. Pinto, 260 AD2d, supra at 622). DRL 253 [6] defines barrier to remarriage: "As used in the sworn statements prescribed by this section "barrier to remarriage" includes, without limitation, any religious or conscientious restraint or inhibition, of which the party required to make the verified statement is aware, that is imposed on a party to a marriage, under the principles held by the clergyman or minister who has solemnized the marriage, by reason of the other party's commission or withholding of any voluntary act. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require any party to consult with any clergyman or minister to determine whether there exists any such religious or conscientious restraint or inhibition. It shall not be deemed a "barrier to remarriage" within the meaning of this section if the restraint or inhibition cannot be removed by the party's voluntary act. Nor shall it be deemed a "barrier to remarriage" if the party must incur expenses in connection with removal of the restraint or inhibition and the other party refuses to provide reasonable reimbursement for such expenses. "All steps solely within his or her power" shall not be construed to include application to a marriage tribunal or other similar organization or agency of a religious denomination which has authority to annul or dissolve a marriage under the rules of such denomination."