Paul Kostro’s Law Blog

Law Lessons from MARCH v. GOLDBERG, Appellate Division, A-5801-05T3, October 9, 2007, not approved for publication [LINK]: A provision in the property settlement agreement allowing modification of the alimony award is consistent with case law which provides that an alimony award made at the time the divorce was entered, whether by agreement or court order, may be adjusted based on a finding of changed circumstances. Lepis v. Lepis, 83 N.J. 139, 149-50 (1980).

When evaluating whether a modification in the support award is required, the court must consider the needs of the dependent spouse in light of the marital standard of living. Crews v. Crews, 164 N.J. 11, 29 (2000). Alimony is designed to enable the supported spouse to achieve a lifestyle that is “reasonably comparable to the one enjoyed while living with the supporting spouse during the marriage.” Id. at 16. While changed circumstances may generate a need to increase the alimony payments, they also may cause a decrease in the award because the payments are unnecessary to enable the supporting spouse to maintain the marital standard of living. Lepis v. Lepis, supra, 83 N.J. at 153. When considering support awards, the court should take “[a] closer look . . . at the supported spouse’s ability to contribute to his or her own maintenance, both at the time of the original judgment and on applications for modification.” Id. at 155. Support payments may be reduced where there has been “a significant change for the better in the circumstances of the dependent spouse.” Stamberg v. Stamberg, 302 N.J. Super. 35, 42 (App. Div. 1997).

The party seeking to change the support award has the burden of making a prima facie showing of changed circumstances. Miller v. Miller, 160 N.J. 408, 420 (1999).

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

Law Lessons from BLACKSHEAR v. WATKINS-BLACKSHEAR, Appellate Division, A-5977-05T2, October 5, 2007, not approved for publication [LINK]: “‘Bad faith is not simply bad judgment or negligence.’” Borzillo v. Borzillo, 259 N.J. Super. 286, 294 (Ch. Div. 1992) (quoting Stath v. Williams, 367 N.E.2d 1120, 1124 (Ind. Ct. App. 1977)). It implies knowing or purposeful wrongdoing. Ibid. Bad faith also includes an intent to mislead or deceive. Ibid. Filing a motion to terminate an alimony obligation and to reduce a child support obligation based on facts known to be untrue fits this definition of bad faith. Id. at 293-94.

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

Law Lessons from CELLER v. CELLER, Appellate Division, A-94-06T5, October 5, 2007, not approved for publication [LINK]: “[W]hile settlement is an encouraged mode of resolving cases generally, ‘the use of consensual agreements to resolve marital controversies’ is particularly favored in divorce matters.” Weishaus v. Weishaus, 180 N.J. 131, 143 (2004)(quoting Konzelman v. Konzelman, 158 N.J. 185, 193 (1999)). “[F]air and definitive arrangements arrived at by mutual consent should not be unnecessarily or lightly disturbed.” Smith v. Smith, 72 N.J. 350, 358 (1977)

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

Law Lessons from SHANKS v. ARRIETA, Appellate Division, A-5757-05T5, October 1, 2007, not approved for publication [LINK]: When a person has shifted to a job earning less money, which clearly does not draw on his prior skills, experience and earning capacity, the court has held that “the obligor must explain that choice with reference to other options explored and efforts to find work with comparable pay.” Storey v. Storey, 373 N.J. Super. 464, 472 (App. Div. 2004). Otherwise, such obligor faces imputation based on a realistic assessment of capacity to earn. Id. at 474.

“Imputation of income is a discretionary matter not capable of precise or exact determination but rather requiring a trial judge to realistically appraise capacity to earn and job availability.” Ibid. “Rarely is there evidence that an obligor turned down an offer of employment at a fixed amount, and proof of that or similar certainty is not a prerequisite to imputation.” Ibid. “A trial judge’s decision to impute income of a specified amount will not be overturned unless the underlying findings are inconsistent with or unsupported by competent evidence.” Id. at 474-75; Tash v. Tash, 353 N.J. Super. 94, 99 (App. Div. 2002); Rolnick v. Rolnick, 262 N.J. Super. 343, 359-60 (App. Div. 1993). Competent evidence includes data on prevailing wages from sources subject to judicial notice. N.J.R.E. 201; Child Support Guidelines, supra, Appendix IX-A to R. 5:6A at 2292.

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

Law Lessons from SHANKS v. ARRIETA, Appellate Division, A-5757-05T5, October 1, 2007, not approved for publication [LINK]: The Supreme Court has held that the non-custodial parent or secondary caretaker “bears the burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence that despite the presumption favoring the custodial parent’s [or secondary caretaker’s] choice of name, the chosen surname is not in the best interests of the child.” Gubernat v. Deremer, 140 N.J. 120, 145 (1995); see also Ronan v. Adely, 182 N.J. 103, 109 (2004).

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

Law Lessons from CHAN v. HUIE, Appellate Division, A-761-06T5 [LINK], September 19, 2007, not approved for publication: While an award of counsel fees may be appropriate when a party acts in bad faith, Yueh v. Yueh, 329 N.J. Super. 447, 460 (App. Div. 2000), it cannot be imposed upon a matrimonial litigant simply as punishment. See Ridley v. Dennison, 298 N.J. Super. 373, 381 (App. Div. 1997).

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

In 1996, a new immigration law dramatically increased penalties for immigrants convicted of crimes. The law established that immigrants — even those who have obtained permanent residence — can be deported if they are convicted of “aggravated felonies,” a term for offenses labeled as serious under immigration law.

Furthermore, immigration cases increasingly involve illegal immigrants charged with relatively minor offenses, such as driving without a license.

For the source of this information, see HERE.

With Open Adoption, a New Kind of Family.

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

If you want to publish your relationship’s obituary, check out THIS SITE.

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.

Law Lessons from TREITLER v. TREITLER, Appellate Division, A-1403-06T2 [LINK], September 13, 2007, not approved for publication:  Where college costs have been specifically allocated to one parent by mutual decree, the motion judge was not required to apply the multi-factor analysis of Newburgh v. Arrigo, 88 N.J. 529, 545 (1982), utilized in situations where the parties have not reached such an agreement.

If you are interested in Mediation; or have issues relating to Child Support, Divorce, or Domestic Violence, please call me to schedule an appointment — I can be reached by telephone at (908)486-2200; or by Email. You may also want to check-out my Guide to “Family Law” in New Jersey.