By denying ownership in the marital home in his bankruptcy case and taking the opposite position in his divorce action, the husband was attempting to manipulate the legal system to his advantage. Judicial estoppel was warranted. Romano, IV v. Romano, New Jersey App. Div., February 7, 2012
Categories
- Adoption
- Adultery
- Agreements
- Alimony
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Annulment
- Appeals
- Arbitration
- Bankruptcy
- Books
- Business Valuation
- Case Information Statement
- Celebrity Divorces
- Child Custody
- Child Removal & Relocation
- Child Support
- Child Support Guidelines
- Child Visitation
- Cohabitation
- College Expenses
- Constitution
- Counsel Fees
- Criminal
- Current Affairs
- Custody
- Discovery
- Divorce Grounds
- Domestic Violence
- Emancipation
- Engagement
- Equitable Distribution
- Estate & Post-Death
- Evidence
- Experts
- Fraud
- General
- Gifts
- Grandparent Visitation
- Guardianship
- Immigration
- Immunity
- Imputed Income
- In The News
- Insurance
- International
- Jurisdiction
- Legal Fees
- Legislation
- Limited Duration Alimony
- Marital Life Style
- Marital Premises
- Mediation
- MILITARY
- Miscellaneous
- Modification
- Palimony
- Parenting
- Partition
- Paternity
- Pendente Lite
- Personal Injury & Torts
- Personal Property
- Pets
- Practice & Procedure
- Prenuptial Agreements
- Private Investigation
- QDRO
- Religion
- Relocation & Removal
- Retirement
- Same Sex Marriage
- Sanctions
- Social Security
- STOCK OPTIONS
- Surrogate Parenting
- Taxation
- Temporary Support
- Torts
- Trusts
- Unmarried Relationships
- Visitation
- Wills, Death, Estate Planning
- Wiretap
