« August 2005 | Main | October 2005 »
The mother agreed that New Jersey child support payments for the parties' older son should terminate due to his emancipation. However, she objected to the father's retroactive reimbursement request. Although the court ordered the emancipation, the recapture application was denied. The father had inexplicably delayed for several years in filing his motion. Polner v. Polner, New Jersey App. Div., September 27, 2005
He was convicted of a disorderly persons offense by contempt of a New Jersey domestic violence final restraining order. However, his conviction is reversed : his opportunity both to cross-examine witnesses and to present his own evidence was unduly restricted by the trial judge. Because that judge has already made adverse credibility determinations, the case must be retried before a different judge. State v. Mehta, New Jersey App. Div., September 26, 2005
The wife owned the home before their New Jersey marriage. Because of this, the trial judge refused to grant the husband any share of that property in their New Jersey divorce. This was reversible error. Not only did he contribute money toward the maintenance of the home, but he used his own funds to enable the wife to own -- in essence, to purchase -- the house free and clear of the debt which was outstanding on the property at the time of their marriage. Pollack v. Pollack, New Jersey App. Div., Sep 23, 2005
Dad won the right to unsupervised visitation with his daughter and Mom appealed. She was concerned about his emotional problems and allegations of child abuse investigated by New Jersey DYFS. The trial judge reviewed defendant's recent psychological evaluations as well as the DYFS reports and found no basis to refuse unsupervised visitation. The parties were ordered to participate with the daughter in therapy sessions with a professional selected by the court, since they were unable to agree on a therapist themselves. DiGiacomo v. Toff, New Jersey App. Div., September 22, 2005
He's been in jail for many years. Why? He stiffed his New Jersey divorce lawyer. Here, his most recent application for release from incarceration is denied again. The trial judge found no changed circumstances because the defendant proved neither lack of control over his putative assets nor the persons managing them, nor did he otherwise establish impecuniousness. Marshall v. Matthei, New Jersey App. Div., September 21, 2005
Even grandparents can be charged with domestic violence. Here, the New Jersey grandfather made calls to the plaintiff, during which he allegedly used coarse language and told her to "stay away from" him, but admittedly made no threats. Although plaintiff testified she was "nervous and scared" because defendant weighed 340 pounds and because of the past she had with his son, it was unreasonable for plaintiff to feel threatened, nor was there any evidence that defendant's purpose was to harass plaintiff. The domestic violence finding is reversed. Ramos v. Ceaser, New Jersey App. Div., September 20, 2005
The son and the daughter were suing each other over their deceased mother's estate. A prima facie case of undue influence had been proven. Therefore, the Estate was responsible for all of the $67,661.93 incurred in counsel fees because the other issues raised in the New Jersey litigation were intertwined with the will contest and because it therefore could "fairly be said" that all of the fees were related to the will contest. In Re Estate of Vayda, New Jersey Ch. Div., September 19, 2005
Reversing the denial of the New Jersey father's petition for the return of his child from the United States to Australia under the Hague Convention, the appellate court holds that it was error to find that the father consented to the removal or retention of the child under article 13(a) of the Convention, thereby defeating his claim for return. Baxter v. Baxter, United States Court of Appeals, 3d. Cir., September 16, 2005
New Jersey Chief Justice Poritz has assigned Judges Jack Sabatino, Christina Miniman and Marie Lihotz to the Appellate Division from November 7 to February 5. They will be doing appellate work in addition to their current assignments. Sabatino sits in the Family Part in the Mercer Vicinage; Miniman is in Civil in Passaic; and Lihotz is in Family in Burlington. Judges Paulette Sapp-Peterson of Mercer, Travis Francis of Middlesex and Kenneth Levy of Essex are already on temporary Appellate Division duty. New Jersey Lawyer, September 15, 2005
It's possible to change a New Jersey alimony order. But the law and the facts have to support the requested modification. Here, the ex-husband tried and failed to reduce or eliminate his alimony obligation nine times. Having conducted a careful review of the ex-husband's circumstances, including his income, his expenses, and his assets, the trial court ruled that the application had "absolutely no merit." The decision is affirmed. Kuhn v. Kuhn, New Jersey App. Div. September 14, 2005
