The verdict is in. A judge ruled against a wife who broke new ground, and perhaps established new heights in ego-centrism, by broadcasting her complaints about her husband on YouTube. As Norman Sheresky, a Manhattan divorce lawyer, said in April, “It’s the kind of thing judges frown upon.”

Oh yes. Frown they do.

The six-minute video, posted in April, was called “One More Crazy Day in the Life of a Phoenix Rising from the Ashes.” In it, Tricia Walsh-Smith said her husband, Philip Smith, never had sex with her, but kept a stash of Viagra, condoms, and porn.

One complaint, she said, was that her husband tried to curb her habit of buying $600 pairs of shoes on his credit card.

Wearing raccoon eyes and filmed in her lavish Park Avenue apartment, she was hardly doing herself any favors.

The press had a field day: “Her unblinking zombie eyes seemed to mirror some madness in the soul,” said “New York” magazine.

“A wild-eyed Walsh-Smith looks about as sane as Ozzy Osbourne on a three-day coke binge,” said “Wired” magazine.

The judge skipped the invective, but was no less harsh.

“She has attempted to turn the life of her husband into a soap opera by directing, writing, acting in and producing a melodrama,” Judge Harold Beeler said, calling the videos — there were three of them — “a calculated and callous campaign to embarrass and humiliate her husband.”

Smith, 76, head of the Shubert Organization of Broadway theaters in New York, sued Walsh-Smith, 52, for divorce last year, after eight years of marriage, charging her with cruel and inhuman treatment.

What kicked it off, apparently, was a request by Walsh-Smith to change the terms of their prenuptial agreement. The agreement, signed three weeks before their 1999 wedding, called for her to get $750,000 as a divorce settlement. It also, she said, called for her to get a half a million dollars if her husband died, and possession of a two-bedroom condo in Palm Beach.

On the other hand, the prenuptial agreement gave him the right to remove her from their apartment within 30 days after the filing of a divorce action.

She informed him last fall that she wanted to break the pre-nup. What she wanted was money from the Florida condo now. In other words, she wanted a revised agreement.

Raoul Felder, who represented Walsh-Smith ever so briefly, called her pre-nup “stupid.”

Then things got ugly between Smith and his wife. Just when she wanted more money, he wanted less of her.

“The New York Daily News” quoted him as saying that she was prone to verbal outbursts. “Whatever I tried to say, I was not sufficiently able to cope with the situation,” he told them.

He filed for divorce.

“He has no grounds for divorce,” she said in the video, “but he's still trying to throw me out of our apartment in 30 days for no reason, I don't know why."

In February she was informed that her husband would pay only half of her $46,000 credit card bill. Things escalated when friends warned her in March not to leave their apartment, saying he might change the locks.

That’s when she told him that she was going to take her side of the story public, on the Internet.

And just in case the millions of people who viewed it on YouTube weren’t enough, she emailed the link to his business clients and partners.

“She wanted to make sure the word got out,” David Aronson, lawyer for the husband, said.

In testimony in June in New York Supreme Court, Smith testified that he was “embarrassed” and “violated” by the video, which led to an epic-length story in New York Magazine.

A lawyer for Walsh-Smith said that she had made the video because she had no other choice: “She was crying out to Philip, 'Here I am, help me!’ ”

No dice, the judge said.

He ruled on Monday that the prenuptial agreement would stand. And that she therefore had 30 days to leave their apartment. In return she would get the $750,000 she was promised in the prenuptial agreement.

Minus, of course, her lawyers’ fees.

Hell may have no fury like a woman scorned, and these high-tech days that fury can be far-reaching, with sometimes uncontrollable consequences.

If you decide to make a YouTube video, make sure you show yourself in no makeup, talking about your quiet domestic life and your attendance at parent-teacher conferences and your charity work. It won’t get four million views, but it also won’t land you on the cover of New York magazine.

And that’s a good thing.