New Jersey Family Law

JERSEY CITY NEW JERSEY HUDSON COUNTY DIVORCE ATTORNEY SUPPORT ARREARS

Even though the New Jersey judgment of divorce was entered in 1980, the final restraining order was entered in the 90's and both children are now in their thirties, the ex-wife wanted child support arrears, paternity testing, an accounting and termination of a final restraining order prohibiting her from having any contact with the ex-husband or his family members. The New Jersey divorce judge denied all these applications, ruling that the ex-wife had no standing to seek the testing because the money had been disbursed to the daughter twelve years earlier, and the daughter, who was now 35, could make the application herself. The child support arrears claim was dismissed because support payments ended 12 to 14 years ago and no records were produced to support the claim. Finally, the ex-wife did not produce any evidence to support her request to vacate the final restraining order.     Donofrio v. Donofrio, New Jersey App. Div., August 23, 2007

CONVENT STATION NEW JERSEY MORRIS COUNTY PATERNITY MEDIATION

May the Parentage Act’s statute of repose, N.J.S.A. 9:17-45b, be equitably tolled to allow the filing of a child-support-reimbursement complaint against the biological father 8 years after the repose period had elapsed ? Under the facts presented here, the doctrine of equitable tolling is not applicable and the action against the biological father is barred by the Parentage Act's statute of repose. The trial court was correct in dismissing the paternity claim.    R.A.C. v. P.J.S., Jr., et al., New Jersey Supreme Court, ___ N.J. ___ (2007); July 9, 2007

BERGEN COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER

The New Jersey divorce judge properly considered the factors in Gubernat v. Deremer, and justifiably granted the father’s application to change the name of his son from O’Reilly, the mother’s surname, to O’Reilly-Spencer. Although the parties never married, and the father initially did not appear supportive of the pregnancy or necessarily believe the child was his, he later scheduled a paternity test which established that he was the boy’s biological father, and began spending time with him and voluntarily paying child support. O’Reilly v. Spencer, New Jersey App. Div., January 25, 2007.

HACKENSACK DIVORCE LAWYER

Defendant was statutorily presumed under N.J.S.A. 9:17-43a(1) to be the father of a child born to his wife during their marriage and he was properly relieved of all financial obligations for the child when genetic testing established he was not the biological father. However, he is not entitled to recover from his ex-wife sums he paid for the support of the child from birth to the time that the presumption of paternity was rebutted. In spite of her deceit, the ex-wife is not liable for reimbursement of child support. She was not unjustly enriched, because responsibility for support runs from parent to child, not parent to parent. Requiring reimbursement would be contrary to the best interests of the child because that would result in depletion of resources for the child. If anyone has been unjustly enriched, it was the biological father : the putative father's remedy is against him, not the mother. J.S. v. L.S., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App.Div. 2006); New Jersey App. Div., December 18, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE MEDIATOR

On the biological father's appeal from an order requiring he and his daughter's psychological father each to pay child support, held (1) the biological father was properly ordered to submit to genetic testing, even though he was unaware of his 12-year-old daughter until shortly before the action commenced and even though he wanted nothing to do with her, (2) equitable estoppel did not make the psychological father solely responsible for the daughter's support, absent interference by the psychological father with support from the biological father, and (3)although the biological father had the primary support obligation, it was proper for him to share the obligation with the psychological father because the biological father could not pay the entire amount of support. J.R. v. L.R., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div.); New Jersey App. Div., July 17, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE : PATERNITY

If you act like a father, you are a father [at least legally]. New York's highest court has imposed  "equitable paternity" on a man who mistakenly assumed he fathered a girl. He claimed ordering him to pay child support for a child he did not father saddled him with involuntary adoption, in violation of the Constitution and contrary to public policy. However, the focus was not on whether he got a raw deal but on the best interests of the child. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court and the Appellate Division in ordering him to pay child support on behalf of the child he did not father. In doing so, it recognized the legislative concept of "paternity by estoppel" (see Family Court Act §§ 18 [a] and 532 [a]).  Matter of Shondel J. v. Mark D., New York Court of Appeals, July 11, 2006

WHO'S YOUR DADDY?

Yankee superstar Randy "Big Unit" Johnson has a secret 16-year-old love child he's never spoken to - but the pitching ace now wants the girl's mom to return nearly $100,000 he's paid for day care. The $16-million-a-year hurler last month petitioned a judge to recoup 8 years of day-care expenses - plus interest - after the teen's mother asked Johnson to buy a truck and computer for the girl, Heather, as well as cover community college expenses. The hot-tempered future Hall of Famer, who is a born-again Christian, has seen Heather only once - right after her out-of-wedlock birth in 1989, and he demanded a paternity test when Roszell first sought child support in 1998. The 6-foot-1 high-school student "looks like him, walking and talking, a young girl with attitude," said Roszell, who is married and has a son. The New York Post, March 28, 2006

NEW JERSEY PATERNITY FRAUD

It was proper to terminate the defendant's child support payments, even though he treated the boy as his own son and supported him since his birth in 1989 as a result of the parties' unmarried relationship. At age 16, it was first learned this not his biological child. Despite the mother's claim defendant should not be permitted to disavow the obligations he had "voluntarily" undertaken, the judge found she had defrauded defendant with the intention of inducing him to pay for the child, when she knew it was not his. Consent given by virtue of fraud is no consent at all; and any action induced by fraud cannot be deemed "voluntary". Dellavecchio v. Hicks, New Jersey App. Div., March 31, 2006

NEW JERSEY DIVORCE EDUCATION

Charles C. Abut, Esq. was a Featured Lecturer at the 2005 New Jersey Judicial College, presented by the New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts as continuing legal education for the approximately 450 members of the New Jersey judiciary, comprised of the Supreme Court, the Appellate Division and the various Trial Courts. Mr. Abut spoke on the Mandatory Mediation programs annexed to the New Jersey court system, as well as on Private Mediation.    November 25, 2005

Who's Your Daddy?

New Jersey paternity cases sometimes involve denials of fatherhood, accompanied by claims of fraud or deceit. DNA testing has narrowed the false positive cases. But there are still a number of instances when surprises can shock the unwary.  September 28, 2005

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/02/fashion/sundaystyles/02DNA.html