In Mills v. Mills, 447 N.J. Super. 79 (Ch. Div. 2016), the family court was confronted with the issue of whether the defendant (payor spouse) should receive a reduction in his alimony obligation
upon the loss of long-term employment and his subsequent hire at a new job – at a significantly lower salary. Continue reading ›
In September 2014, the New Jersey Legislature amended this State’s statute on alimony. Among the
changes that the new alimony statute contains was a provision related to retirement. The addition that the Legislature made to the alimony statute to include a provision for alimony is lengthy. N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23(j) now provides that alimony may be modified or terminated “upon the prospective or actual retirement of the obligor.” Continue reading ›
We have written previously about issues of cohabitation and it’s impact on the right and obligation to receive and pay alimony. We have also written about the courts’ attitudes towards the 
enforcement of Property Settlement Agreements. On May 3, 2016 the Supreme Court of New Jersey in the matter of Quinn -v- Quinn, — NJ — (2016) [(A-5-14) (074411)], addressed the issue of enforcing terms of a Property Settlement Agreement involving the effect of cohabitation on provisions dealing with alimony in the matter. In this matter the parties, who were married in 1983, entered into a Property Settlement Agreement in 2006 providing that upon the Wife’s cohabitation, per case or statutory law, her alimony would terminate. 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 ›
Previously we have written about the 2014 modifications to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23 which dramatically changed the law in New Jersey as it relates to alimony. As outlined in that blog, the statute not only eliminated permanent alimony as a judicial option but clarified the law as it related to the impact of: cohabitation, retirement and loss of employment on alimony. The effective date of that statute is September 10, 2014. The bar has been awaiting cases dealing with the new alimony statute’s impact on new matters as well as how it would apply to matters resolved prior to its effective date. Continue reading ›
My colleagues and I have previously written on the topic of Domestic Violence, Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO), and Final Rrestraining Orders (FRO). Specifically, I have previously written on the subject matter of contempt proceedings where the Defendant in a domestic violence action can be held in contempt for violation of either a TRO or FRO. Continue reading ›
On December 18, 2013 the New Jersey Appellate Division published an opinion in the matter of Harte v. Hand. In the opinion, the Appellate Division addressed the issue of how to properly calculate child support on behalf of children of multiple families. Continue reading ›
In July I wrote a blog explaining Assembly Bill A3909. This Bill, loosely based on a Statute enacted in Massachusetts, affected a broad range alimony reform. Continue reading ›
It is not uncommon for someone who is paying alimony to a former spouse to be concerned about or to find him or herself faced the scenario of paying alimony to a former spouse who becomes involved in a committed, romantic relationship with a paramour but is not remarried. The person paying alimony often suspects that the former spouse is choosing to not to remarry because the remarriage will result in a termination of alimony. The New Jersey Supreme Court has held that such “cohabitation” is a change in circumstance that can trigger the court revisiting the issue of alimony. Gayet v. Gayet, 92 N.J. 149, 154-55 (1983). Continue reading ›
New Jersey Divorce and Family Lawyer Blog