When Religious Beliefs and the Law Clash
Religion cannot be used as a defense for non-consensual sexual relations between a husband and wife, according to a recent ruling by the New Jersey Appellate Court.
Religion cannot be used as a defense for non-consensual sexual relations between a husband and wife, according to a recent ruling by the New Jersey Appellate Court.
Two years after the murder of a New Jersey mother of two, state lawmakers are considering a bill that would increase protection for victims of domestic violence and the children of those families.
In June 2008, Monica Paul was shot and killed, allegedly by her estranged boyfriend, in a north Jersey YMCA while her 4-year-old son was in swimming class. The couple’s 11-year-old daughter witnessed the incident. Ms. Paul had taken out a restraining order against the boyfriend, Kenneth Duckett, shortly before the shooting. (1)
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.
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.
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)
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.
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
Court Enunciates New Test for Tolling Child Sex Abuse Statute of Limitations
By Michael Booth
New Jersey Law Journal
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.
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.