Following the August 2015 amendments to New Jersey’s Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, a New Jersey trial court has recognized economic abuse as a form of domestic violence predicating the issuance of a final restraining order. This decision provides hope to victims who may suffer from historically unrecognized forms of domestic violence, such as economic abuse, which is designed to harass, intimidate and wield improper control over a partner or former partner.
In a recent decision, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court in New Jersey found that a divorcing party’s history of regular savings as part of their marital lifestyle requires the inclusion of savings as a component of alimony even where there is no need to create savings to protect the future payment of alimony to the recipient spouse.
Ambiguities related to the interaction between cohabitation-based alimony modifications and the 2014 amendments to New Jersey’s alimony statute have abounded until the Appellate Court weighed in with a fairly recent decision. This decision affects any ex-spouses who pay or receive alimony, when the recipient spouse has entered a new relationship that is serious enough to be considered tantamount to marriage.
In a divorce, arbitration can be an efficient and effective way to narrow and resolve the many issues that may arise. But what happens when a party disputes the outcome of an arbitrator’s award or the scope of an arbitrator’s power? In the unpublished decision of Sirigotis v. Sirigotis, the Appellate Division reiterated the Court’s limited power to review or vacate arbitrators’ awards under New Jersey’s version of the Uniform Arbitration Act.
Despite their name, final restraining orders are not always final. Final restraining orders (FROs) can be dissolved or modified upon good cause shown by the applicant.
In an April 2016 unpublished decision, the Appellate Division has clarified the legal standards applied when a primary custodial parent seeks to relocate out of state subsequent to the execution of a non-relocation agreement.
In the January 2016 decision Anthony C. Major v. Julie Maguire, the New Jersey Supreme Court clarified the pleading standards and case management procedures in grandparent visitation actions.
A recent decision by the New Jersey Superior Court (Ocean County) dispels a common misconception in how parties argue (and judges decide) pendente lite (while the divorce is pending) applications for alimony. This decision enunciates a standard with which pendente lite alimony applications could be adjudicated in light of the 2014 amendments to New Jersey’s alimony statute.
The issue of when to retire and how retirement will affect a payor’s alimony obligation is not new to family law practitioners, judges or litigants. What has evolved is the consideration of when to retire under New Jersey’s recently amended alimony statute. Under New Jersey's recently amended alimony statute, a party may seek to terminate or modify his or her spousal support obligation based upon an actual or prospective retirement.
New Jersey’s civil RICO statute is an under-utilized tool in New Jersey divorce cases, combating fraudulent business tactics that have the effect of divesting a spouse of marital monies, gains on investment and equitably distributable business interests.