New Jersey Family Law

CLIFFSIDE PARK BERGEN COUNTY NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER

On appeal, the defendant ex-wife sought the recusal of the New Jersey divorce judge. The Appellate Division concluded the judge improperly declined to require plaintiff to submit his current financial information in deciding defendant's motion and erroneously denied defendant's request for reimbursement of tutoring expenses. Moreover, the judge demonstrated such a significant degree of animus and impatience towards defendant that the remand proceedings must take place before a different judge.       Isaacson v. Isaacson, New Jersey App. Div., April 29, 2008

BLOOMINGDALE NEW JERSEY PASSAIC COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER

It was proper to deny the ex-husband's motion for relief from the 1996 New Jersey judgment of divorce, requiring him to pay the ex-wife $500 for counsel fees she incurred in opposing his motion. His primary claim was that equitable distribution should be modified because she allegedly concealed a savings account and a worker's compensation award. However, a motion for relief from a judgment based on alleged fraud must be made within one year. Even if this could be extended because the fraud could not have been discovered within that time, defendant's papers did not describe how he discovered the fraud, nor why it could not have been discovered sooner.     Sherman, etc. v. Garcia, New Jersey App. Div., March 4, 2008

MONTCLAIR NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE

The Early Settlement Panel judge abused his discretion in sanctioning defense counsel for his failure to appear at the ESP proceeding, finding his excuse – that he was stuck for hours in major traffic due to flooding – inadequate. Counsel had called the courthouse on several occasions to advise of his predicament, and ultimately was told he was released by a law clerk. He did not separately call plaintiff's counsel, because he assumed the law clerk would advise her. The trial judge failed to properly follow the procedures governing a contempt citation. Defense counsel's behavior was not contumacious and the imposition of any sanction was a mistaken exercise of discretion.      Cimmino v. Cimmino, New Jersey App. Div., February 28, 2008

TOTOWA NEW JERSEY PASSAIC COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION LAWYER MARITAL HOME

Over the ex-wife's objection, the New Jersey divorce judge found the ex-husband's arguments more credible, and determined the share of each to the proceeds from the sale of the former marital home. The ex-wife presents no reasons why the judge was incorrect in his determination, but merely argues the same list of credits and debits she presented below. Many of the items for which defendant sought reimbursement were for expenses she incurred prior to the divorce, which were globally resolved in the parties' original New Jersey divorce agreement.     Morgan v. Morgan, New Jersey App. Div., January 4, 2008 

JERSEY CITY NEW JERSEY HUDSON COUNTY DIVORCE LAWYER MEDIATION

The New Jersey divorce judge denied the ex-wife's motion to change venue of the parties' divorce action. She claimed her ex-husband was an attorney who practiced in the area for years and had been director of Legal Services. No prejudice or showing of an inability to get a fair hearing was made. In addition, there was no abuse of discretion in denying the motion to vacate provisions of the New Jersey Judgment of Divorce, based upon alleged fraud committed by defendant. The New Jersey divorce agreement was entered into knowingly and voluntarily, with the assistance of counsel. Moreover, the motion was not filed within one year, as required by New Jersey Rule 4:50-2.     Rhody v. Rhody, New Jersey App. Div., November 15, 2007

HACKENSACK NEW JERSEY BERGEN COUNTY ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE

Plaintiff, a limited partner in a real estate investment company, alleged that it transferred title to some of its properties to its attorney, Joseph L. Basralian, Esq., as a "straw man," allegedly to hide its ownership and to dupe the Department of Environmental Protection into allowing it to build a road on protected wetlands. Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case of fraud. The attorney's testimony about his role in this transaction can be compelled under the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege.    Langanella Property Mgmt., LLC, etc., et al. v. Hekemian, et al., New Jersey Ch. Div., November 9, 2007

WAYNE NEW JERSEY PASSAIC COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION LAWYER ALIMONY

Does the ex-husband have the "the realistic ability" to earn the $170,000 in imputed annual earnings "in 2007 and in the foreseeable future" ? The case is remanded for further proofs in a plenary hearing to determine this issue. It was error for the New Jersey divorce judge to deny the application because there were genuine and material issues of fact that required "an evidentiary re-evaluation of the parties' financial circumstances." Although the ex-husband had "severely failed to give appropriate priority and attention to his support obligations," denial of the application on the papers was incorrect.    Hawley v. Levine, New Jersey App. Div., November 7, 2007

ESSEX FELLS NEW JERSEY ESSEX COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION ATTORNEY

The New Jersey divorce judge entered an order that retroactively increased the ex-husband's child support obligation, required him to contribute to the cost of a car for his son, and directed him to provide an accounting of the liquidated marital stock options to be placed into a joint bank account. Since the order in question and the record below indicate that the payments in the order are "subject to proofs and accounting," no final decision has been made. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as interlocutory.      Stinga v. Stinga, New Jersey App. Div., October 17, 2007

MORRISTOWN NEW JERSEY MORRIS COUNTY DIVORCE MEDIATION LAWYER

The ex-wife tried to vacate the 1998 New Jersey judgment of divorce. Before the judgment was entered, and after negotiations had taken place, she apparently told her attorney she objected to the divorce; and when her attorney sent her the final consent judgment prepared by the other lawyer, she never responded to his letter asking her if he should sign it on her behalf. The motion to vacate was brought 8 years later and was properly denied because of failure to provide meritorious reasons for the lengthy delay. The application was denied due to laches and estoppel.    Long v. Long, New Jersey App. Div. October 3, 2007

MADISON NEW JERSEY DIVORCE MEDIATION

Because the New Jersey divorce transferred defendant’s marital tort claim pursuant to Tevis v. Tevis from the Family Part to the Civil Part without undertaking the analysis required by Brennan v. Orban, the matter is remanded to determine if the matter can be tried by a jury in the Family Part in the exercise of ancillary jurisdiction, or whether those claims should be severed and transferred to the Civil Part for trial by jury.     Patel v. Patel, New Jersey App. Div., May 22, 2007