New Jersey Family Law

JERSEY CITY NEW JERSEY HUDSON COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER

In a child custody dispute controlled by the New Jersey Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:34-53 to -95, the Appellate Division held (1) New Jersey retains "exclusive, continuing jurisdiction" pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-66 over a custody order entered by a New Jersey court as long as there is either a "significant connection" with New Jersey or "substantial evidence" available in New Jersey about "the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships," (2) the father and child had retained a "significant connection" with New Jersey, but (3) the Family Part abused its discretion by failing to decline jurisdiction pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-71 in favor of the child's home state of Maryland.    Griffith v. Tressel, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (2007); New Jersey App. Div., June 22, 2007

HACKENSACK NEW JERSEY BERGEN COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY

The Appellate court affirms the New Jersey divorce judge who (1) awarded $33,000 per year in limited-duration alimony for 14 years, which was rationally linked to the graduation of the parties' youngest child and was based on the ex-wife's role as full-time homemaker and child-care provider, (2) vacated as contrary to Lepis v. Lepis the provision that barred any reduction in alimony unless the ex-husband's gross annual income fell below $80,000 or the ex-wife's total annual income exceeded $30,000, (3) affirmed the order that enforced the New Jersey judgment of divorce by requiring the ex-husband pay 75 percent of the camp expenses for the children, and (4) affirmed the award of $2,300 in attorney's fees to the ex-wife.   Schwartz v. Schwartz, New Jersey App. Div., June 21, 2007

HACKENSACK NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER APPEALS

The ex-husband claimed the New Jersey divorce judge erred by (1) failing to give him an opportunity to develop his case by not ensuring he received information requested during discovery and pre-trial conferences; (2) failing to equitably distribute the marital assets, precluding him from participating in the discussion of his pension and erring his valuing the marital home; and (3) failing to consider the best interests of the parties' son. These contentions are rejected and the decision is affirmed. Bailey v. Bailey, New Jersey App. Div. June 20, 2007

MORRIS COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER LIMITED DURATION ALIMONY

The New Jersey divorce judge correctly imputed income to the ex-husband for purposes of determining his obligation to pay limited duration alimony to the ex-wife. Although he said he sold his share of the family business to his brother, the evidence indicates he retained some interest or was at least still actively involved in the business, a largely cash concern, making it easy to hide income. But the amount and duration of the alimony award---$450 per week for 10 years -- are reversed and remanded, for fact-finding on the marital standard of living and her actual need for support.    Ceca v. Ceca, New Jersey App. Div., June 19, 2007

MORRISTOWN NEW JERSEY MORRIS COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY

After their New Jersey divorce, they agreed to arbitrate their post-judgment disputes and signed an arbitration agreement stating "any decision of the Arbitrator can be appealed on the same basis as an Order on Judgment of the Superior Court."  However, such an appeal must be to the Appellate Division and not the New Jersey divorce court. The parties may not by contract create appellate jurisdiction.    Hogoboom v. Hogoboom, etc., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2007); June 18, 2007, New Jersey App. Div.

SUMMIT NEW JERSEY UNION COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY CHILD EMANCIPATION

The father was entitled to have the parties' son declared emancipated. The son accumulated only 9 credits his first semester of college, 3 credits in the spring semester, and did not reenroll for his sophomore year. Finding a prima facie case for emancipation on the papers, the New Jersey divorce judge opined it was up to the mother to rebut the prima facie showing, and she failed to do so. Except for the son's "bald certification" that his father's "lunatic" behavior caused him not to be able to concentrate, she did not submit any evidence, such as transcripts or proof of enrollment elsewhere. The judge also noted she failed to comply with a prior order requiring her to provide the father with all of the son's educational records. There was no need to hold a Newburgh hearing.    Clayton v. Deter, etc., New Jersey App. Div., June 15, 2007

WEST PATERSON NEW JERSEY DIVORCE MEDIATION

A student who has lived in New Jersey for twelve months prior to enrollment is presumed to be a domiciliary for tuition purposes under N.J.S.A. 18A:62-4. If that student is dependent on out-of-state parents, the presumption in the student’s favor is neutralized. The New Jersey Supreme Court holds that all of the evidence must be considered to determine if the student’s domicile is in New Jersey. Shim v. Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey, ___ N.J. ___ (2007); New Jersey Supreme Ct., June 14, 2007

MORRIS PLAINS NEW JERSEY DIVORCE RETIREMENT ATTORNEY

To determine whether voluntary retirement constitutes a change in circumstances that justifies reducing a child support obligation, the New Jersey divorce judge developed a multifactor test by modifying the variables that apply to reducing alimony based on early retirement. Applying the new test, the New Jersey divorce judge denied the father’s motion to reduce his child support obligation based on his voluntary retirement at age 61.    Lissner v. Marburger, New Jersey Ch. Div., June 13, 2007

FORT LEE NEW JERSEY DATING RELATIONSHIP MEDIATION

A final New Jersey restraining order was justly entered against defendant, with the court's jurisdiction being based on the conceded dating relationship that the parties once had. The history between the parties -- including specific events established in the evidence -- was not the basis of the FRO, but rather was used by the court to develop an understanding of the parties' personal relationship so that an appropriate evaluation of the allegations of the complaint could be made.  

JERSEY CITY NEW JERSEY HUDSON COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY BANKRUPTCY

It was correct for the New Jersey divorce judge to deny the father's motion to stay wage garnishment. Both the child support arrears and the child care expenses are in the nature of support and therefore not dischargeable in bankruptcy.    Salamoni v. Salamoni, New Jersey App. Div., June 11, 2007