High 10 Regulation Circumstances of 2020′

By Victoria Paone Rosa, Esq.

ROTE BANK – John P. Paone, Jr., Esq., The founding and managing partner of the law firms of Paone, Zaleski & Murphy, was here a speaker for the 2021 Family Law Symposium. The symposium is the seminal family law lecture held annually held and attended by more than 700 marriage practitioners, judges, accountants and other family law professionals across the state.

Mr. Paone presented the top 10 reported family law decisions in 2020, which are briefly discussed here.

1. Pathri v. Kakarlamath, 462 NJ Super. 208 (App. Div. 2020) – While there is no court ruling in New Jersey that governs simultaneous video (i.e. zoom) statements in marital acts, legal proceedings should evaluate such requests on a case-by-case basis by judges there are six different factors to consider. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, almost all family court proceedings in New Jersey virtually take place at this time.

2. SW versus GM, 462 NJ Super. 522 (App. Div. 2020) – In the context of determining alimony, litigation courts in marital actions must determine the marital lifestyle by articulating and numerically quantifying each category of lifestyle costs.

3. ST v 1515 Broad Street, LLC, 241 NJ 257 (2020) – In the absence of a guardianship hearing and a court finding through clear and convincing evidence that a party lacks the mental capacity to decide how to proceed in legal process If the action is to be taken, the court does not have the power to appoint a guardian ad litem to make decisions on behalf of that party.

4th CC versus JAH, 463 NJ Super. 419 (App. Div. 2020) – Although the parties never had a single personal date, never visited each other’s homes or met with friends and family members, the parties conducted an exorbitant series of intimate communications (e.g., texting and e- Mail) so that their interaction constitutes a dating relationship within the meaning of the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (PDVA).

5. Gormley v Gormley, 462 NJ Super. 433 (App. Div. 2019) * – As part of the maintenance investigation, if the social security authority has determined that a party is disabled, a disability is assumed, which then shifts the burden to the other party in order to overcome and refute the presumption.

(This story continues below the ad.)

6. Ippolito versus Ippolito, ____ NJ Super. _____ (App. Div. 2020) – NJSA 2A: 13-5 allows a attorney’s lien against “a judgment, report, decision, arbitration, judgment, or final order in favor of his client” and if the attorney’s previous client has not received a final hearing, then there is no “arbitration award or judgment” to which the attorney’s lien could be bound.

7. Amzler versus Amzler, 463 NJ Super. 187 (App. Div. 2020) – Since the marriage contract of the parties was concluded prior to the date on which the amendments to the Maintenance Act of 2014 came into force, the plaintiff’s application for termination of maintenance due to early retirement should have been assessed as part of the court according to the court NJSA 2A: 34-23 (j) (3) and the “savings” factor must be taken into account.

8. CN versus SR 463 NJ Super. 203 (Ch. Div. 2020) – A divisional lawsuit remains an available remedy for unmarried housemates who do not limit themselves to writing their oral agreements under the January 18, 2010 amendment to the Fraud Statute. An unmarried roommate who claims a property division claim must be able to demonstrate that he or she was involved in a joint venture or business that entitles him or her to a share in the asset.

9. Ferrer v Colon, 463 NJ Super. 12 (Ch. Div. 2019) * – Overtime pay is a “sporadic income” which is a fluctuating income that can be offered but is not guaranteed to an employee. When sporadic income is included in the New Jersey Child Support Guidelines for calculating child benefit, it is averaged over a period not exceeding three years.

10th SC versus JD, 462 NJ Super. 452 (Ch. Div. 2019) * – Half-siblings who did not live together full-time as children, but spent longer periods of time together, are considered “former household members” and thus fall under the jurisdiction of the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA).

For more information on the ten family law cases reported in 2020, please visit the Paone, Zaleski & Murphy website. You can also access the ten family law cases reported in other years on the firm’s website.

* Decided in 2019, approved for publication in 2020.

(Editor’s Note: Victoria Paone Rosa, Esq., Is a member of the Paone, Zaleski & Murphy law firms and works in the firm’s Red Bank office at 120 Maple Avenue. Victoria’s career includes employing the Honorable Mara in Monmouth County E. Zazzali-Hogan for the Family, Law and Civil Divisions for 2016-2017 and is currently a member of the New Jersey State Bar, Middlesex Bar, Monmouth Bar, Monmouth County Legal Aid, and Aldona E. Appleton Family Law Inn of Court. Victoria limits her practice to divorce, alimony, custody, fair distribution, alimony, domestic violence, alimony, palimony and all other family law issues. Ms. Paone was selected by the Middlesex County Bar Association. Young Lawyer of the Year 2020 ”. Her monthly column“ Divorce Hotline ”serves to inform readers about f Inform about family news, divorce process advice and comments on recently released family members, legal cases, and more. Paone, Zaleski & Murphy can be contacted at 732-750-9797.)

Comments are closed.