New Jersey Family Law

DENVILLE MORRIS COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE ATTORNEY MEDIATION AGREEMENT

The New Jersey divorce granted the father's motion to amend the parties' New Jersey judgment of divorce to incorporate a settlement agreement  and to terminate child support in accordance with that agreement. The mother argued (1) specific performance of the agreement was inappropriate; (2) there was no meeting of the minds; (3) equity should not have enforced the agreement; (4) she lacked the capacity to enter into an agreement; and (5) a plenary hearing was required. Each of these claims was properly rejected and the Appellate Division affirms, substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Slomienski.    Deverman v. Deverman, New Jersey App. Div., September 8, 2009

JERSEY CITY HUDSON COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE ATTORNEY MEDIATOR

The husband agreed to waive his right to alimony from the wife, in exchange for her waiver of child support from him. However, although property settlement agreements are favored, they cannot circumvent a parent's child support obligation. The New Jersey divorce judge correctly ruled that the child support obligation could neither be prepaid nor waived by the New Jersey divorce agreement or otherwise.    Anello v. Anello, New Jersey App. Div., March 31, 2009

 

FORT LEE NEW JERSEY BERGEN COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER

The wife moved to set aside the parties' postnuptial agreement pursuant to which she surrendered her interest in significant assets in exchange for the husband's agreement to buy a home for her with a maximum value of $600,000. The wife signed the agreement against the advice of her attorney, while she was undergoing treatment and suffering from the mental and physical effects of complications arising from a surgery. The agreement was drafted by the husband's attorney. The trial court's decision to vacate the agreement is now affirmed on appeal.    Barchella v Barchella, 2007 NY Slip Op 07647, November 8, 2007

WEST CALDWELL NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION LAWYER AGREEMENT

Instead of a fully executed New Jersey divorce agreement; the parties agreed to "place the settlement on the record." But they forgot to mention one of the operative terms. The trial judge resolved the resulting dispute under the 5-day rule, and determined that the language would remain in the form submitted by one of the attorneys. Any objection to this process was waived. The trial court's decision is affirmed.     Crincoli v. Crincoli, New Jersey App. Div., September 10, 2007

MADISON NEW JERSEY MORRIS COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS

After waiting for 2 years, the ex-husband tried to set aside the New Jersey divorce agreement. He claimed he was suffering from ongoing mental impairment at the time of the New Jersey divorce and did not understand what he was doing. But the evidence supports the New Jersey divorce judge's ruling that the claimed brain injury dates back to 1978 and had been consistent since then. Furthermore, the psychological opinions were speculative and not based on evaluations or treatment contemporaneous with the divorce. Finally, the judge aptly held that the negotiated terms of the divorce judgment were not inequitable given the totality of the circumstances, including the fact that no children were involved.    Bornstein v. Bornstein, New Jersey App. Div., August 20, 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

SADDLE RIVER DIVORCE MEDIATION

Their February 2005 New Jersey divorce agreement provided for child support and alimony based on a stipulated amount of income for the ex-husband. More support was to be paid if his income increased. The issue was how to treat $73,000 which he received in January of 2005, bringing his total income for that year well over the base amount. He argued that none of this amount should be included for purposes of calculating additional support because it was received before the execution of the New Jersey divorce agreement February, 2005. Although the New Jersey divorce judge agreed, the Appellate Division reverses, based on the plain language of the agreement.    Kaplan v. Kaplan, New Jersey App. Div., March 9, 2007

DON'T FORCE NEW JERSEY DIVORCE AGREEMENTS

It was error to enforce the New Jersey divorce agreement which defendant had entered into without the benefit of counsel. The court never took testimony as to the merits, which was prepared by plaintiff's counsel, but merely found that it had been entered into voluntarily, which defendant disputes. Also, a serious question concerning the fairness of the agreement has been raised by defendant, who received only $12,500 against a net equity of $157,000 in the marital property.  Thompson v. Thompson, New Jersey App. Div., January 25, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE SETTLEMENTS

  On an application to enforce a settlement where the opposition is founded on claims of duress and lack of mental capacity to contract, a party's emotional distress and apprehension over counsel's purported withdrawal from representation is insufficient to vitiate the agreement. Nor does that party's absence when the settlement he executed is later placed on the record render the agreement any less binding, since there is no legal requirement that there even be court approval in such a case. Both the attorney and the spouse of the party now opposing enforcement acted within the scope of their authority -- actual and apparent, respectively -- so that the agreement is enforceable against the absent wife.   Jennings, et ux. v. Reed, et ux., et al., ___N.J. Super.___ (App. Div. 2005); November 11, 2005

No Do Over

  When you sign your New Jersey divorce agreement, don't expect a "do over". Here, because (a) the ex-wife either had knowledge of the circumstances or the opportunity to obtain additional information and (b) she stated under oath she was freely and voluntarily consenting, the court properly denied her application to rescind the parties' settlement agreement.  Rivera v. Rivera, New Jersey App. Div., June 13, 2005