New Jersey Family Law

ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS BERGEN COUNTY DIVORCE COUNSEL FEES MEDIATION LAWYER

On 3 separate occasions, the ex-wife tried to have the ex-husband's income recalculated. But she failed each time, especially since her allegations pertained to circumstances that existed several years prior to their New Jersey divorce. This forced him to incur needless fess and costs. The decision to reimburse him is affirmed on appeal. Ramirez v. Ramirez, New Jersey App. Div., December 1, 2009

SHORT HILLS ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY MEDIATOR FEES

This case demonstrates not only the New Jersey divorce judge's power to award counsel fees in a New Jersey divorce action, but also is an example of how the Appellate Division can also assess attorney fees and costs for appellate issues. It also shows how the Appellate Division can exercise its original jurisdiction to modify that portion of the appellate expenses associated with strictly matrimonial matters.   Lester v. Lester, New Jersey App. Div., November 24, 2009

MILLBURN ESSEX COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE FEES COSTS COUNSEL MEDIATION

The wife incurred over $73,000 in counsel fees during this New Jersey divorce action. Although the New Jersey divorce judge found the husband had filed over 37 applications, most of which were either denied or in bad faith, no counsel fee award was entered in favor of the wife, because it would allegedly have been "futile". The claimed "futility" was due to the husband having filed a bankruptcy petition and being in substantial arrears of support. This ruling was erroneous and is now reversed. Counsel fees should have been assessed against the husband, in recognition of the principle that bad-faith litigation has costs and consequences.    Sellitti v. Sellitti, New Jersey App. Div., October 21, 2009

HOBOKEN HUDSON COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE ALIMONY ARREARS MEDIATION

The ex-husband repeatedly failed to make his alimony payments. So the ex-wife was compelled to make numerous applications for enforcement. She sought not only collection of the alimony arrears but also counsel fees and interest. Finally, he made good on the arrears with a lump of $144,000. But neither counsel fees nor interest were properly awarded to the ex-wife and the New Jersey trial judge erred in those two respects. Accordingly, the Appellate Division reversed and remanded for appropriate corrections on these two issues.  Scheps fka Papparazzo v. Papparazzo, July 22, 2009

 

CRESSKILL BERGEN COUNTY MATRIMONIAL NEW JERSEY DIVORCE MEDIATION LAWYER

The ex-wife appealed from that part of the New Jersey judgment of divorce which denied her counsel fees and expert costs. She claimed the New Jersey divorce judge prevented her from submitting the certification of services required by Rule 4:42-9(b) and erroneously concluded she was not entitled to counsel fees because defendant's position in the litigation was neither unreasonable nor lacking good faith. Although a certification of services was never presented, it does not follow that she had no opportunity to do so. In fact, the attorney fee application would have denied in any event, due to the respective financial position of the parties.   Corin-Bonder v. Bonder, New Jersey App. Div., June 10, 2009

MONTVILLE MORRIS COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE ATTORNEY

Use of "nonrefundable" New Jersey divorce retainer agreements is unethical and unenforceable. This is according to a decision just released, accepting the findings of an ethics special master that in two cases, Elliot Gourvitz Esq. violated the Rules of Court, barring nonrefundable retainers, and, in a third, flouted an ethics rule requiring return of unearned legal fees.  In The Matter of Elliot Gourvitz, New Jersey Supreme Court, May 13, 2009

SECAUCUS HUDSON COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER

The New Jersey divorce judge entered an order for counsel fees, merely based on the reasons defendant’s attorney set forth in his certification of services. By doing so, the judge did not perform the requisite analysis and the award of attorneys’ fees to defendant is vacated. The case is remanded for consideration of the factors in Rule 5:3-5(c) and the parties’ good or bad faith.    Gajera v. Sojitra, New Jersey App. Div., October 23, 2008

CHESTER MORRIS COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER MEDIATION

Previously, the New Jersey divorce judge failed to make findings as to the reasonableness of attorneys’ fees and the award of $15,000. On remand, the same judge awarded counsel fees of $60,000. But, once again, the appellate panel finds the judge engaged in little further analysis, and did not specifically refer to certifications or affidavits demonstrating the accuracy of fees sought. Because the rationale for counsel fees must be set forth on the record, the case again remanded to this judge, for strict adherence to the  rules.  http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/a6302-05.pdf;   Finne v. Finne, New Jersey App. Div., May 14, 2008;

ROSELAND NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE ALIMONY COUNSEL FEES

This New Jersey divorce case involved a 26 year marriage. The husband appealed from the New Jersey judgment of divorce that granted alimony and denied counsel fees. The ex-wife suffered from Lupus, had sustained two strokes, and was determined to be disabled by the United States Social Security Administration. Accordingly, the court held that no income should be imputed to her. Plaintiff bore the burden of overcoming the presumption of defendant's disability and he failed to do so. Defendant had no means to pay a counsel fee award . In any event, applying the appropriate factors, each party should pay his or her own attorney fees.     Reader, Jr. v. Reader, New Jersey App. Div., February 20, 2008

EMERSON NEW JERSEY BERGEN COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER ATTORNEY FEES

Some New Jersey divorce Judges compel the parties to exchange pretrial written settlement offers under seal. If the case doesn't settle, the Judge then looks at these proposals after the fact, to determine which party was "unreasonable" and assesses counsel fees accordingly. The Appellate Division has just ruled this practice is improper and constitutes reversible error : "A remand is also required to correct legal error. It was not proper to consider settlement proposals in fixing counsel fees...There is no authority to award or enhance a fee because one party's settlement offer is "fairly reasonable" and the other's offer is "decidedly less so."       Dounis v. Dounis et al., New Jersey App. Div., January 25, 2008