New Jersey Family Law

NEW JERSEY MATRIMONIAL LAWYER

Plaintiff had the right to audiotape her medical examination by the defense expert. But the expert "dug his feet in the sand" and refused to allow the taping. The court finds exceptional circumstances and extends discovery, so that the defense will be allowed to obtain a new expert and get a new medical examination of plaintiff, which will be allowed to be taped. The report of the prior expert is suppressed and must not be given to the new physician. The prior expert will not be permitted to testify in the case and no reference to his report or examination will be permitted.  Tavaska, et vir. v. Belknap, et al., New Jersey Law Div.; July 31, 2006

NEW JERSEY FAMILY LAWYER

The father of a disabled woman who died last year is entitled to half her estate even though he had little contact with her during her life, a state judge ruled yesterday. Ruben Martinez will receive about $400,000 of the $1.1 million remaining for the care of his daughter, Jennifer Rogiers, born with severe disabilities. The girl's mother, Rosa Rogiers, also received $400,000 and an additional $300,000 to compensate her for the years of care she provided. The money comes from a 1989 malpractice settlement. Jennifer Rogiers died at the age of 22. In granting Martinez the money, New Jersey Judge Olivieri dismissed claims by Rogiers that her former boyfriend -- the couple never married -- should get nothing because he was not involved in his daughter's upbringing and paid no child support.    Newark Star Ledger, July 28, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE ATTORNEY

The ex-husband was required to pay his ex-wife $146,000 as his share of counsel fees and expert fees incurred from the inception of the New Jersey divorce through 3-1-02, the date of a pendente lite order. But this was excessive : (1) the ex-wife was entitled to receive $100,000 from plaintiff as his fair share of the fees incurred up to 3-1-02; (2) the ex-husband was further obliged to pay one-quarter of the then-outstanding additional expert fees; and (3) each side was responsible for its own legal fees after 3-1-02.  Brooks, Jr. v. Brooks, New Jersey App. Div., July 27, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER

The court properly suspended defendant's current child support obligation arising out of his New Jersey divorce until his daughter reenrolled in college, and directed him to continue to pay child support as long as his daughter is enrolled as a full time college student. However, that part of the order requiring him to pay toward child support arrears is reversed. The judge never considered defendant's laches-based arguments that the Texas state officials, at some point, told defendant to stop paying support and returned his payments to him, at which time the money was redirected and committed elsewhere.  Berard v. Pfeil, New Jersey App. Div., July 26, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE MEDIATION

The ex-wife's motion for increased alimony was properly denied. This was in spite of the ex-husband's increased income from his law practice, her ill health and her pay cut. His increased income was the only changed circumstance since the New Jersey divorce. She was not entitled to share in that increase after the New Jersey divorce because she failed to prove how her current level of support, when combined with her current income and lack of dependents, failed to provide her with resources equivalent to those available during the parties' marriage. Schott v. Surman, New Jersey App. Div., July 25, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER

What is required in order to declare a 5-year old child sexual abuse victim competent to testify? New Jersey's highest court holds there was no abuse of discretion in the trial court's determination that the child witness was competent. The presumption of the New Jersey evidence rules is that every person is competent to testify unless, among other things, the proposed witness is incapable of understanding the duty to tell the truth. New Jersey Rule of Evidence 603 requires an oath, affirmation or declaration to tell the truth under penalty of law and is included within New Jersey Rule of Evidence 601, which requires that a competent witness understand the duty to testify truthfully.  State v. G.C., ___ N.J. ___ (2006); New Jersey Supreme Court, July 24, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE MEDIATOR

On the biological father's appeal from an order requiring he and his daughter's psychological father each to pay child support, held (1) the biological father was properly ordered to submit to genetic testing, even though he was unaware of his 12-year-old daughter until shortly before the action commenced and even though he wanted nothing to do with her, (2) equitable estoppel did not make the psychological father solely responsible for the daughter's support, absent interference by the psychological father with support from the biological father, and (3)although the biological father had the primary support obligation, it was proper for him to share the obligation with the psychological father because the biological father could not pay the entire amount of support. J.R. v. L.R., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div.); New Jersey App. Div., July 17, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER

 Giants defensive end Michael Strahan secretly installed a videotaping system in his home and recorded his future sister-in-law undressing, his wife testified in their New Jersey divorce case yesterday. "I had found video equipment in my bedroom," Jean Strahan said in New Jersey divorce court in Newark. "He had been taping my sister undressing." Strahan, who was living with her future husband, said Michael Strahan wired $30,000 to her bank account as a result of the incident. But Judge James Convery waived her off the subject. She was not able to say whether the money was intended for her sister. Her New Jersey divorce testimony about the videotape was one of several surprise revelations, as her attorney sought to place embarrassing details on the record to undermine Michael Strahan's credibility. His attorney appeared livid about the salacious information slipping into the record, including the tidbit that his client had a sperm analysis while the couple were trying to have children, but he made no comment afterward. Newark Star-Ledger, July 13, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE : PATERNITY

If you act like a father, you are a father [at least legally]. New York's highest court has imposed  "equitable paternity" on a man who mistakenly assumed he fathered a girl. He claimed ordering him to pay child support for a child he did not father saddled him with involuntary adoption, in violation of the Constitution and contrary to public policy. However, the focus was not on whether he got a raw deal but on the best interests of the child. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court and the Appellate Division in ordering him to pay child support on behalf of the child he did not father. In doing so, it recognized the legislative concept of "paternity by estoppel" (see Family Court Act §§ 18 [a] and 532 [a]).  Matter of Shondel J. v. Mark D., New York Court of Appeals, July 11, 2006