There is a case called Sheridan, that requires judges to report the failure to report income to the proper authorities. Like Big Foot and the Lochness Monster, many people have heard of a Sheridan, but few have actually seen it in the wild. Now, most judges believe that the duty to report is after a trial where there is testimony and evidence, and not during the pre-trial/motion stage. I’m not sure that Sheridan actually says that, but that is the most common interpretation I have heard of. With so few cases actually being tried, that is possibly the reason why so few people have actually see ..read more

Since the 2014 amendments to the alimony statute were enacted, we have seen this clutching at pearls and gnashing of teeth about what to do in long term (over 20 years) marriages when the payor is in her/his 60s. The amendment to the statutes established a bright line of 20 years for the entitlement to open durational alimony. Limited duration alimony was statutorily proscribed to “up to the length of the marriage. The statute also included a presumptive retirement age tied to Social Security which is now age 67 for most people. That said, people did not know what to do in cases that would ot ..read more

I can lie and pretend to watch educational series, all law dramas, during my limited free time between work and two little kids, but I will be honest and tell you that reality TV runs on repeat between my husband’s sports (or during…). Divorce and family law have always been a theme throughout the shows, so much so that Bravo played a Girlfriend’s Guide to Divorce as a scripted series (for better or worse). But, over the last year, family law themes have creeped their way into some of our most beloved/longer series regulars, going back to the domestic violence on the Jersey Shore that was allo ..read more

In the unpublished (non-precedential) decision of K.E.M. v. S.R.A., the Appellate Division used the trial court’s findings to reinstate a Final Restraining Order (“FRO”) based on the predicate act of cyber harassment. In this case, while the facts are salacious, the procedure is just as interesting in the lawyer world. The plaintiff obtained an FRO against the defendant after a full trial based on predicate acts of harassment and cyber harassment, and a continuing need for protection based on prior history. The defendant appealed. While the appeal was pending, the trial court entered an Amend ..read more

Litigating cases involving a prenuptial agreement can be frustrating at times. When prenups are done right, there is proper disclosure, both parties have counsel or acknowledge that they had a right to counsel, there is sufficient time, there is a waiver of seeking further disclosure, and the terms are not unconscionable, notwithstanding the fact that someone might be giving up rights upon death or divorce that they would otherwise have had but for the prenup (that’s exactly why there are prenups.) However, when it comes time for the divorce, despite the fact that the prenup was done right, t ..read more

I started reading C.G. v. D.W., an unreported (non-precedential) Appellate Division case released on March 1, 2024, sucked in by the opening sentence about the court’s denial of an intra-state move. As there aren’t that many cases on that issue since the A.J. v. R.J. case I blogged about in 2019. But the decision took a left turn because it turned, not on the merits of the intrastate move, but rather, on the failure to address the child’s preference, which is one of the factors, and the failure to interview the child. Because the decision is basically limited to that issue, the facts are not ..read more

I have extensively blogged on the importance of formalizing arbitration agreements in the context of divorce or post-judgment actions in compliance with the applicable Court rules, offering technical and practical advice if you considering arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution avenue to resolve your case. The recent New Jersey Appellate Division case of Kotsogiannis v. Dimaras (A-1426-22) serves as a cautionary tale for divorcing couples, highlighting the critical importance of formalizing agreements to arbitrate through enforceable channels in post-judgment family matters. The cas ..read more

Earlier this month, I wrote a blog called Court’s Should Not Issue FROs to Address Parenting Issues. That blogged addressed a case where the trial court entered a Final Restraining Order (FRO) to remedy custody and parenting issues when the underlying act was not actually domestic violence. I did not think that I would be blogging about that topic again so soon, but alas, a similar theme was addressed in the unreported (non-precedential) case of T.L. v. J.D.G., released on February 26, 2024. The Appellate Division had a lot to say about the trial court errors in their 42 page decision (partic ..read more

Over the years, I have blogged several times on the Appellate Division rejecting a trial court’s use of a formula to calculate alimony as opposed to a fulsome consideration of the statutory alimony factors. I blogged about cases that rejected the use of formulas both for initial alimony awards, and when the issue of modification was before the Court. In fact, the only case I ever saw that approved the use of a formula, sort of, was a 2011 unreported decision in a malpractice case that said that the so called “rule of thumb” was an appropriate way to calculate alimony as part of a settlement ..read more

Alimony is generally modifiable if a substantial and continuing change of circumstances can be shown. Typically, when we think about changes of circumstances in this regard, we generally look at financial changes of circumstances related to the income of the payor or recipient. While permissible, we don’t often look at custody and parenting time issues to be the change of circumstance to get discovery and a plenary hearing to modify alimony. However, in the case of Dong v. Li, an unreported (non-precedential) Appellate Division decision released on February 23 , 2024, parenting time issues we ..read more