New Jersey Family Law

ROSELAND NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER CHILD CUSTODY RELOCATION

The New Jersey divorce judge authorized the father to relocate to Florida with 2 of the parties' 4 adopted children, with the mother to have daily contact with the relocated children through the Internet and by telephone, and visitation during the summer and holidays. In her pro se appellate brief, although the mother did not raise any substantive arguments that Baures v. Lewis had been misapplied, the Appellate Division nevertheless conducted an independent review and ruled the father had ample "good faith reasons" for the Florida move. It was not "inimical" to the best interests of the children.    D.A. v. S.J.-A., New Jersey App. Div., August 6, 2007

WHIPPANY NEW JERSEY MORRIS COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY

The New Jersey divorce judge was correct in denying the ex-wife's request for a plenary hearing on her allegation of the ex-husband's alleged non-disclosure and misrepresentation regarding his assets. The parties' New Jersey divorce agreement was fully negotiated, with both parties represented by counsel. There was no overreaching or fraud.    Rusconi v. Rusconi, New Jersey App. Div., August 3, 2007

BEDMINSTER NEW JERSEY SOMERSET COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION GRANDPARENT VISITATION

The father's visitation rights with his two children had previously been terminated, based on overwhelming evidence that he sexually abused them and embarked on a relentless campaign to alienate them from their mother. Now, the New Jersey divorce judge also terminated the visitation rights of the paternal grandmother, because she lived with her abusive son. The Appellate Division affirms, based on the mother's fundamental due process right to raise her child free from judicial interference and supervision. R.G. v. H.G., New Jersey App. Div., August 2, 2007

MILLBURN ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATOR CHILD CUSTODY

The father wanted equal physical custody and parenting time with his 2 year old child, in addition to joint legal custody, where the parties lived half mile from each other. However, the father was able to see his child every day and already had one overnight per week. Because the parties' current practice, which had been in effect for a year, was working well without any disruption to the child, the New Jersey divorce judge was correct in denying the father's application.  Perez v. Sanchez, New Jersey App. Div., August 1, 2007

MILLBURN NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION CHILD SUPPORT

The father's motion to reduce his child support payments and arrears was properly denied by the New Jersey divorce judge. There was a failure to demonstrate a sufficient change in circumstance. Among other things, the father did not provide a current Case Information Statement and he also failed to explain why there was a dramatic increase in his weekly salary. It was entirely appropriate for the judge to consider defendant's earning capacity "over the long haul."    Caputa v. Caputa, New Jersey, App. Div.; July 31, 2007

SHORT HILLS NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION

The ex-wife's appeal from the New Jersey divorce judge's custody determination was properly dismissed as time-barred. When the order was entered --- denying her request to relocate to New York with the parties' daughter and noting that, if she did so, the father would get custody of the child --- she did not appeal and moved anyway. Even in response to the father's limitations-based opposition to her current motion, she made no attempt to explain her delay. If there is evidence that the current custody situation is no longer in the best interests of the child, then the mother is free to seek modification of the order.     Bazin v. Stoll, etc., New Jersey App. Div, July 27, 2007

HACKENSACK NEW JERSEY BERGEN COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATOR

Boyfriend's gifts to girlfriend during their engagement, including vacations, money for a vehicle, and a vasectomy, did not carry an implied condition of marriage. These were not conditional gifts because (a) he failed to establish his intent was to condition the gifts on a marriage taking place between them; (b) the purposes of the gifts were not frustrated when the marriage did not occur; and (c) the nature of the gifts did not establish they were conditional. Hess v. Johnston, Utah Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007;  http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/appopin/hess062107.pdf