Articles Posted in child support

|

It is that time of year when us practicing New Jersey attorneys submit our registration renewals and pay any required fees in order to continue to be able to practice law for the coming year. Despite its trials and tribulations at times, practicing Family Law, and assisting my clients through what is an often difficult, emotional and challenging set of life circumstances, it is not only rewarding and satisfying, but is a privilege as well. Indeed, the ability to practice law is considered a “privilege” and not a “right.” Like many other professions, attorneys must be licensed to be able to practice their profession after satisfying various rules and requirements established not only by the profession’s governing body-in this instance, the New Jersey Supreme Court- but by the State as well. Besides such occupational licenses, there are numerous other types of licenses that the State may issue, whether they be licensed to drive, participate in recreational activities (i.e., hunt, fish, operate a boat, etc.) Continue reading ›

|

On March 17, 2016, the New Jersey Appellate Division issued an unpublished opinion in the case of Parrish v. Klugar 2015 WL 10488423 (App. Div. 2016).   In the Parrish case, the father appealed IMG_2849from an August 18, 2014 post-judgment Family Part order that denied his motion to emancipate his then twenty-one-year-old child, ordered the parties to cooperate with a parenting coordinator and abide by her recommendations, and directed the parties to “‘return’ to a psychologist for updated psychological evaluations for themselves as well as their two younger children, then ages thirteen and twelve. Continue reading ›

|

547eb27fd9ff1_-_gays-and-baby-0810-3-lgn[1]In a recently published decision, D.G. and S.H. v. K.S., FD-1386-14S, the Honorable Stephanie M. Wauters, J.S.C., issued what could prove to be a groundbreaking decision as the definition of family continues to develop and evolve with the ever changing times.  The original ninety-six page decision decision was abridged to twenty-two pages for the published decision in this matter. In this particular case, the Court was presented with a situation the litigants creatively referred to as a “tri-parenting” relationship, wherein three friends agreed to conceive, raise and take care of a child, O.S.H., together as one unit in two households.  Continue reading ›

|

file000739321417On October 21, 2015, the Hon. L.R. Jones, J.S.C., a family court judge in Ocean County issued an opinion that was approved for publication this week in the matter of Fichter-v-Fichter. Judge Jones addressed the question of whether a parent already paying child support pursuant to those Guidelines also has to pay an additional amount for child support of a new licensed unemancipated teenage driver. Continue reading ›

|

Earlier this month, the New Jersey Appellate Division took up the issue of whether or not a litigant living as a fugitive outside the United States has standing to challenge a default judgment entered by the trial relating to custody and support. The case of Yvietta Matison v. Mark Lisantary, involved an appeal by the father from the trial court’s June 20, 2014 order denying his motion to vacate a May 1, 2013 default judgment, which awarded the mother palimony and custody of the couple’s twin children, who were born in 2004. The court based its ruling on the facts submitted by the mother because the father did not participate in the litigation. According to the mother, “Before she came to the United States in March 2006, the father purchased a home valued at approximately $1.9 million in Franklin Lakes and paid for substantial renovations to the home. He also provided a nanny, interior decorator and secretary. During this time, [ the father] returned to Europe to conduct business and [the mothejudger] remained in the Franklin Lakes home with the children and the nanny. He subsequently sold the property, and plaintiff and the children moved to Tenafly where the children were enrolled in private school. [The father] continued to provide support to plaintiff from abroad. Continue reading ›

|

In New Jersey, it is well established that both parties have an obligation to support their children financially.  Accordingly, child support obligations are one of the primary issues dealt with when a marriage or relationship ends between people who have children, whether it be my consensual agreement or court order. However, the amount of child support due may be subject to a later modification.  After the entry of a child support obligation, there are a number situations or circumstances that can occur that might warrant a later termination of modification of that child support obligation, including but not nearly limited to the following: the child’s emancipation, a change in the child’s needs, the involuntary loss of income to one of the parents, or a substantial increase in the income of either parent. Continue reading ›

|

The current state of the law in New Jersey regarding children’s (or their primary custodial parent’s) right to child support is that children are not necessarily deemed emancipated upon reachingCollege-Student-Discounts the age of 18, but that emancipation may occur later when the child completes full-time post-secondary education, gets married, dies, enters the military service, or some other emancipation triggering event.  The New Jersey Supreme Court in the leading case of Newburgh v. Arrigo, 88 N.J. 529 (1982), addressed the issue of emancipation, including the extent to which a child’s attainment of the age of majority, now 18 (N.J.S.A. 9:17B-3), would affect a duty to support. Continue reading ›

|

19-08-2In any number of cases, the issue of imputation of income can and will arise with regard to one or both parties when issues of alimony or child support arise. Generally speaking, in matrimonial cases an issue over imputation of income often arises when, say one party has been unemployed for some time, or where a party is not earning or reporting income consistent with that person’s ability to do so.  The case law in the State of New Jersey is fairly straightforward when it comes to when and how income should be imputed to an individual, however, there have been some recent developments that highlight some nuances. Continue reading ›

|

Generally, when a motion to modify a child support obligation is made New Jersey’s “anti-retroactivity statute” only allows a modification in child support retroactive to the date that the motion was filed.  N.J.S.A. specifically states:

“No payment or installment of an order for child support, or those portions of an order which are allocated for child support established prior to or subsequent to the effective date of P.L.1993, c. 45 (C.2A:17-56.23a), shall be retroactively modified by the court except with respect to the period during which there is a pending application for modification, but only from the date the notice of motion was mailed either directly or through the appropriate agent. The written notice will state that a change of circumstances has occurred and a motion for modification of the order will be filed within 45 days. In the event a motion is not filed within the 45-day period, modification shall be permitted only from the date the motion is filed with the court.”  (Emphasis added). Continue reading ›

|

In May of this year, my colleague Daniel Burton, Esq. wrote a  blog entitled “One Set of Twins Two Fathers Confirms New Jersey Superior Court Judge” about a trial court level decision of the Honorable Sohail Mohammed, J.S.C., in Passaic County concerning the paternity and related child support obligations to twins, referred to as “AM” and “BM” born to their mother referred to as “TM”.  The Appellate Division has now weighed in and issued a written opinion on this case of first impression in New Jersey. Continue reading ›