In a case of first impression, a Monmouth County judge dealt with the difficult issues of when and how a parent’s terminal illness impacts custodial rights. In A.W. v. T.D., the parties divorced in 2002 after having three children currently between 12 and 14 years of age. The parties share joint legal custody, with the mother (T.D.) serving as the children’s primary custodian and caretaker.
In response to a lingering question arising from the recent court decision permitting same-sex marriage in New Jersey (Garden State Equality v. Dow), the New Jersey Department of Health has issued a statement confirming that New Jersey will recognize the validity of same-sex marriages performed in other states. As a result, such couples do not need to get “re-married” in New Jersey.
Now that same sex couples are able to marry in New Jersey (and twelve other states), it is important to understand the tax issues involved.
Well, the wait is over. As a result of New Jersey recognizing same sex marriage, some same sex couples will eventually join the ranks of the not-so-happily married and participate in that exhausting experience known as a contested divorce. The playing field is leveled and yet problems persist.
In a recently decided case, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court affirmed a lower court ruling that the language in a Marital Settlement Agreement governed modification of child support despite, in the absence of such language, clear cut New Jersey law to the contrary. In Gartenberg v. Gartenberg, a Marital Settlement Agreement was achieved with respect to all issues, including child support.
Ordinarily the terms of a Marital Settlement Agreement are considered controlling upon an application to the court for enforcement of the Agreement.
Under current New Jersey law, four types of alimony exist: permanent, limited duration, rehabilitative and reimbursement alimony. Limited duration alimony (“LDA”) and the circumstances under which the length of LDA can be extended by a court were recently addressed by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court in the case of Jones v. Jones, decided on June 17, 2013.
In the recently decided case of Koeppel v. Pierson, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court affirmed a trial court’s ruling that a child’s paternal grandmother stood in legal parity with the child’s father with respect to parenting rights. This ruling underscores the competing legal rights of a natural parent and other family members, in this case his mother, who had been integral to a child’s upbringing to the extent of acquiring “psychological parent” status and equal legal footing with the natural father. The case is a guide for grandparents who are seeking time with their grandchildren, as well as parents who have reason to resist such efforts.
Although it is conventional wisdom that once a Domestic Violence Final Restraining Order is entered it is permanent, New Jersey law provides a means for seeking a dismissal of the Order in certain circumstances. This was recently made clear by an Appellate Division decision in the case of J.M.F. v. G.M.F., decided on May 6, 2013.
One of the most vexing areas of family law practice involves applications by a custodial parent to relocate out of state with the child(ren) over the objection of the other parent. The legal standard for relocation has evolved over the years and is currently encapsulated in Baures v. Lewis, decided by the New Jersey Supreme Court in 2009.
