New Jersey Family Law Blog

NJ Gay Marriage Supporters, Opponents Rally in Anticipation of Supreme Court Hearing

July 24, 2010 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Groups on both sides of the controversial gay marriage issue rallied in Trenton recently in anticipation of the state Supreme Court’s possible consideration of the matter. (1)

On Tuesday, July 20, 2010, members of the National Organization for Marriage rallied at the Statehouse in support of traditional marriage, which is defined in a 1996 federal law as “between a man and a woman” (2). This rally was countered by the appearance of members of Garden State Equality, New Jersey’s largest gay rights organization.

Child Support Roundup in New Jersey

July 14, 2010 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Supporting a child is an important role a parent and/or a guardian play in a child’s life be it emotional or moral support and certainly, as any parent can attest, monetary support. However, in the case of a family that is no longer intact, monetary child support often is lacking because of the untimeliness of child support payments. Approximately 38% of child support providers are responsible for medical bills, health care, and various other health care costs of the child so it is important that child support is paid on time. (1)

Unfortunately all too often the non-custodial parent falls behind in child support payments.

What You Post May Be Used Against You in Divorce Court

July 9, 2010 | Kearns Rotolo Law

These days, many of us turn to one social networking site or another to reunite with old friends, former classmates and others from our past. While these sites have been successful in helping rebuild some lost relationships, they also have been credited recently with helping to dissolve others.

An article by Martin Di Caro posted on NJ1015.com on June 30, 2010, stated, “The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers says 81 percent of its members have faced or seen evidence in divorce cases gleaned from social networking or dating sites like Facebook, Myspace, or match.com.” (1)

An earlier article by Sue Epstein written for The Star Ledger (March 21, 2010) cited the case of a divorced New Jersey couple who were still trying to work out custody of their teenager. During this time, the girl posted a photo on Facebook of her and her friends partying. The teen’s mother used the photo to support her argument that the father was “too permissive.” (2)

Mendoza – An International Custody Battle

March 11, 2010 | Kearns Rotolo Law

With everything reaching a global level these days, child custody battles are no exception. Parental child abduction is a growing international problem, often the result of a failed marriage that ends with one parent taking the children to a different country. The problem affects parents in many countries.

The case of Alejandro Mendoza is one such international custody battle. Alejandro Mendoza suspects his five-year-old son and three-year-old daughter may now be in Korea, but he is not sure. Violinist Mendoza teaches during the day and performs at night in the Lion King orchestra on Broadway. Mendoza once played a French violin made in 1902 but had to sell it for something he loves even more — his children.

New Ruling on Child Support Modification

June 18, 2009 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Parties’ daughter was killed in an automobile accident on October 6, 2007. On January 10, 2008, the plaintiff filed a pro se motion seeking, inter alia, to reduce child support. The plaintiff argued that any modification should be retroactive to the date of the daughters death, while the defendant posited that the filing date of the plaintiff’s motion should go

The applicable law is N.J.S.A. 2A:17-56.23(a), which basically states that child support can not be made retroactive and will only be permitted from the date of the filing of the motion.

The issue here was whether child support is to be amended on the date of the child’s death or the filing date of the motion. There have been several scenarios where the courts have granted retroactive modification to child support. In the case of Keegan v. Keegan, 326, N.J. Super. 289, 741 A.2d 134 (App. Div. 1999), trial court granted a retroactive increase in the aspect of child support. Halliwell v. Halliwell, 326 N.J. Super. 442, 741 A.2d 638 (App. Div. 1999), dealt with the issue of retroactive modification of an obligor who was incarcerated for an extended period of time

Rotolo Law Firm key in New Jersey High Court Enunciating New Test for Tolling Child Sex Abuse Statute of Limitations

June 12, 2009 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Court Enunciates New Test for Tolling Child Sex Abuse Statute of Limitations

By Michael Booth

New Jersey Law Journal

Fighting over Child Support After the Pink Slip Arrives

June 1, 2009 | Kearns Rotolo Law

New York Times
By: Julie Bosman

The same story echoed a dozen times through Room E8 of Manhattan Family Court in a single day: fathers, pinched by the recession, pleading for a reduction in child support.

A salesman at Saks Fifth Avenue who is estranged from his teenage daughter said he feared he would be included in the next round of layoffs expected at his store.

A man who had been laid off from a factory said he managed to find work at Mets games, but for less pay, $9 an hour. Another man, on the verge of eviction, begged for a break from his $315 monthly payments.

“Last week was my child’s birthday, and I couldn’t get him a present,” he said, burying his head in his hands. “This is killing me.”

Since January, Family Court in New York has been filled with urgent requests like these, alarming judges and overwhelming calendars with what are known as modification cases.

New Business for Courts: Pet Custody

March 16, 2009 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Judges may invoke specific performance remedy, appeals panel says
By Mary Pat Gallagher
New Jersey Law Journal
March 10, 2009

When couples break up, judges can decide who gets custody of pets based on their unique sentimental value, a New Jersey appeals court ruled Tuesday, setting a precedent in the state.

The published opinion in Houseman v. Dare, A-2415-07, reverses a trial court’s finding that pets differ from personal property like heirlooms, family treasures and works of art and therefore that the equitable remedy of specific performance is not available.

Appellate Division Judges Jane Grall, Stephen Skillman and Ronald Graves found that determination erroneous as a matter of law and remanded for further proceedings.

“There is no reason for a court of equity to be more wary in resolving competing claims for possession of a pet, based on one party’s sincere affection for and attachment to it than in resolving competing claims based on one party’s sincere sentiment for an inanimate object based on a relationship with the donor,” Grall wrote.

The case arose out of the broken engagement of Doreen Houseman and Eric Dane. The couple started dating in 1993, bought a house together in Williamstown in 1999 and became engaged in 2000. In 2003, they paid $1,500 for a pug named Dexter.

Dane broke off the engagement in May 2006 and when Houseman moved out two months later, she took Dexter with her, along with what Grall described as his “paraphernalia.” After that, Dexter lived with Houseman, who allowed Dane to take the dog for visits.

In late February 2007, Houseman went on vacation and left Dexter with Dane, but he refused to surrender the dog when she returned on March 4.

Doctrine of Parental Immunity not a protection from ordinary negligence.

March 11, 2009 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Thorpe v. Wiggan, 405 N.J. Super. 68, (2009).

The doctrine of parental immunity has always protected parents from judicial intervention in normal child rearing decisions. The New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division recently reexamined this doctrine in Thorpe v. Wiggan. This matter involves the tragic death of a four year-old child, Joseph Wiggan, who burned to death while a passenger in a car driven by his father. This is a negligence acting being brought by the child’s mother against defendant for failing to remove his son from the car before the fire started. The plaintiff appealed the order dismissing her complaint, and the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial.
There are two versions of the facts. The first was relayed by defendant to a state police detective via telephone. In this version, he was driving on Route 78 when he noticed that his car was emitting smoke. He then heard “2 bangs,” & he smelled the smoke also, so he pulled over into the shoulder. He got out of the vehicle checked around and so the car was full of smoke. His child was in the back seat, but he was unable to get him out. He wound up in the hospital. He got burned.

The second version of the events, the defendant claims he heard the same “2 bangs,” and he believed a tire blew up. The care then “blew up in flames.” He pulled the car to the shoulder, ran into the bushes and rolled to put the fire out that was on him. Plaintiff conceded that she had no claim against defendant for his second version of the events. Plaintiffs only claim lies under the State Police version.

Palimony-in-Writing Bill Passed by Senate Judiciary Committee

February 23, 2009 | Kearns Rotolo Law

By Michael Booth

New Jersey Law Journal

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday approved bipartisan-sponsored legislation that would require all palimony agreements to be in writing and signed in order to be enforceable.