Articles Posted in Jurisdiction

|

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 ›

|

The first Tuesday of every November serves as Election Day in New Jersey and across the United States.  Immigration, both legal and illegal, continues to be controversial issue in current elections.  On Election Day Eve, November 2, 2015, the New Jersey Appellate Division published their Opinion in OYPC v. JCP, — N.J.Super. — (App. Div. 2015), addressing the issues of immigration and custody.  In the case, an older sibling petitioned the court to gain custody of her eighteen year old brother.  Her brother was born in Guatemala, where the father’s name was not listed on the boy’s birth certificate, nor was the father involved in the boy’s life.  The boy’s biological mother (JCP) never disclosed to the child that he was his mother.  Rather, after the boy was born, JCP turned the boy over to his 17 year old sister (OYPC) to be raised as her own child, and JCP pretended to be the boy’s grandmother.  The sister (OYPC) cared for both the boy and her mother (JCP), and OYPC also supported the family. Continue reading ›

|

Approximately one year ago, my colleague wrote a blog post raising awareness and spreading concern about how the communications and content found on one’s social media could potentially be used against them in a variety of ways in Court.  It is no big surprise that with the explosion of social media and the countless ways individuals can communicate in an ever evolving world of technology that those communications are being monitored for potential use in litigation. Continue reading ›

|

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAIn a recent published decision from the Appellate Division, L.T. v. F.M., the Court differentiated between the standards of proof associated with an domestic violence action in the Family Part and a civil action in the Law Division.  The primary issue presented and resolved in this decision was the issue of whether the defendant was collaterally estopped from arguing in the Law Division action that he did not assault the plaintiff after the plaintiff successfully obtained a Final Restraining Order in the domestic violence action in the family court.  Continue reading ›

|

In a recently published trial court decision, Marsico-v-Marsico, the Honorable Lawrence R. Jones, J.S.C., dealt with the novel question of law as to whether or not a designated power of attorney could appear and testify on behalf of or in lieu of a divorce litigant.  After addressing this issue, Judge Jones ultimately decided that a power of attorney could not in fact appear and testify on behalf of a divorce litigant.  Judge Jones was able to delineate and distinguish the factual circumstances of prior case law wherein similar situations were allowed to proceed. Continue reading ›

|

In a recently published opinion, dated February 19, 2014, the Appellate Division analyzed and reversed a trial court’s decision declining to gavelexercise jurisdiction pursuant to New Jersey’s version of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (commonly referred to as UCCJEA).  In this particular case, designated S.B. v. G.M.B., the trial court made a determination  to decline jurisdiction, in favor of the courts of Ontario, Canada, despite the fact that this relief was not specifically requested by either party.  Continue reading ›

|

scalesIn my prior recent posting entitled, “Part One: The Issue of Domicile in Non-Custodial Divorce Cases – Is New Jersey Still My Home?“, I discussed how jurisdiction is determined in matrimonial cases that did not involve a custody dispute. Here, I will discuss how a New Jersey family court will determine whether New Jersey has jurisdiction to decide a custody dispute. Continue reading ›

|

The New Jersey State motto is “Liberty and Prosperity.” Therefore, it should come as no surprise that New Jersey is home to the third largest percentage of millionaires in the Continue reading ›