Clear Proof Of Changed Circumstances Is Needed To Win Motion To Modify Support Obligation

The NJ Appellate Court recently found the Defendant had made a prima facie showing of changed circumstances that would allow him to proceed with his motion for a modification of his support obligations. In DeRosa v. DeRosa, the Defendant owned his own business for installing sprinkler systems for homeowners and provided proofs that the business had experienced a substantial decline in sales revenue from 2006, to 2010, 2011, and 2012. Under the seminal case of Lepis v. Lepis, the court set forth the standard that a prima facie showing of changed circumstances is required to modify support. In DeRosa, the Trial Court denied Defendant's Motion without the benefit of a hearing wherein the Defendant would be permitted to provide evidence and testimony regarding changes circumstances. The Appellate Court remanded the matter to the Trial Court to follow the procedures set forth in Lepis. These cases are determined on a case by case basis which leads to non-uniformity in the court's decisions on cases which may seem similar in nature. The party seeking the modification bears the burden of establishing the prima facie showing of a genuine change of circumstances that is not a mere temporary change but substantial and long-term in nature. It may be due to loss of job by either spouse, decreased income to either spouse, increased income to either spouse, disability of either spouse, increase in cost of living, or the dependent spouse's cohabitation with a paramour. Once it has been established that a substantial change of circumstances exists, the Court will order discovery of all financial documentation and a hearing will take place. If you want to seek a modification of support, are owed support, want to establish or terminate support or if you have been served papers regarding a support issue then you should consult with an experienced family law attorney to protect your rights. For more information about support, child custody, divorce, dissolution or other family law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Palimony Claims Under NJ Laws

Palimony is not determined by when the contract is made but rather when the claim is made. If you think you or someone you love is cared for under a palimony agreement, you should be aware of changes that have taken place in the law and how they affect any agreement you may have. In 2010, the law regarding palimony agreements changed to require a written agreement entered into with the assistance of counsel. Since that time, many individuals have attempted to enforce palimony agreements which came into existence prior to the effective date of the new requirements. In Maeker v. Ross, the NJ Appellate Division held that the palimony claim does not arise until the breach of the agreement or death of the promissor, it is the date on which the claim to enforce the agreement is filed which controls the validity of the agreement. In Maeker v. Ross, Maeker did not work during the parties 13 year relationship. Ross supported her, paid for her son's college education, kept her in a luxurious lifestyle by typical standards and allegedly promised her lifetime support. Maeker had power of attorney over Ross' affairs and both executrix and primary beneficiary under his will. Due to the timing of the parties' breakup, on or about July 2011, the Somerset County Superior Court Judge Thomas Miller decided the Legislature did not express a clear intent to terminate actions which arose in close proximity to the law's effective date. Miller reasoned that inequity would arise by the release of someone making a promise 30 years ago by a statutory change today. The Appellate Division disagreed with Miller, holding a palimony agreement to be a contract like any other and subject to interpretation on the same basis. The Appellate Division found Ross and Maeker had an 18 month period from the enactment of the law to the filing of the complaint to enter into an agreement enforceable under the new statute. Although Ross and Maeker did originally have the intent to enter into such an agreement based on their actions and lifestyle, at the time the requirements changed for a valid palimony agreement changed, the parties' relationship had clearly deteriorated to the point it is probable Ross would not have entered into an agreement under the terms of the current law. If you think you or someone you love is cared for under a palimony agreement or entering into a palimony agreement, you should consult experienced legal counsel to insure your rights are protected. For more information regarding palimony, alimony, child support or other family law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and is not intended to replace the advice of an attorney.

Relocating With Your Child After Divorce

People often find need or reason to move after divorce whether it is for better employment opportunity, a new marriage, better schools or a host of other reasons but when there are minor children involved the court becomes involved in the removal of children from New Jersey. Over time, as our society has become more mobile, the courts have modified the requirements for removal of a child from New Jersey by the custodial parent. Recently, in Benjamin v. Benjamin, the court held the custodial parent no longer has to have a job in the new location but simply "a reasonable plan for providing a stable home" for the child in North Carolina. Although the parties actually shared custody of the child, the mother was designated the parent of primary residence of the child. The court decided that employability rather than employment should be considered because parents cannot always secure a job until they are living in the intended locale when there is already a large pool of candidates seeking employment in most areas. Upon a showing of a good faith intent for the move, a plan to purchase a home for the family and proof of employment opportunities in the area the Judge granted permission for the mother to relocate to North Carolina with the child over the objection of the non-custodial father. If you are seeking or fighting the removal of your child from the state of NJ, you should consult an experienced family law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on child support, custody, parenting time/visitation, adoption, dissolution of a civil union, marriage or domestic partnership, modifications, alimony, palimony or other family or juvenile law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

NJ Same-Sex Marriage After Supreme Court Strikes Down DOMA

The Supreme Court of The United States of America has struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples who are married, in civil unions or other forms of union recognized under state law. The President 's administration stated it would quickly move to ensure same-sex married couples get the same federal tax and other benefits that heterosexual married couples receive. It is still up to the individual states to determine if they will recognize same-sex marriage. In New Jersey, the Supreme Court of New Jersey in its opinion in the 2006 case of Lewis v. Harris, 188 N.J. 415 (2006) held that it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the same rights and benefits that heterosexual couples are given and held that the State could either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or enact a parallel statutory structure by another name in which same-sex couples would enjoy the same rights and benefits and bear the burdens and obligations of civil marriage in the State of New Jersey. The State Legislature established civil unions which do not qualify as "marriage" under the Federal Laws. Governor Christie has made it clear he does not support same-sex marriage. He vetoed a marriage bill passed by the legislature and voiced his disfavor with the Supreme Court's ruling striking down DOMA. He stated he wants the issue left up to the voters of New Jersey. Many in the State Legislature are trying to override Governor Christie's veto. If you are in a same-sex relationship in New Jersey and are interested in protecting or providing for your partner you should consult with an experienced family attorney. For more information about same-sex relationships, palimony agreements, cohabitation agreements, child custody, visitation, dissolution, divorce, child support or any other type of family law matter in New Jersey please visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

New Pre-Nup Law in NJ

A new law signed by Governor Chris Christie last Thursday, the twenty eighth of June, will have a potential everlasting effect on the use of prenuptial agreements throughout the state of New Jersey. The newly signed bill, S-2151, requires that judges are to determine the conscionability as of the signing date, meaning that both parties are held to those terms as of that date, rather than the date of enforcement. The exceptions that would make the agreement unconscionable at the time are determined by whether both parties received full disclosure of assets or were without council at the time of the agreement. The new bill has many attorneys questioning whether this might be the end of the high use of a prenuptial agreements before couples marry. Previously each partner had an opportunity to amend the agreement after it had been signed due to a change in his or her financial circumstances. Couples may be unwilling to sign prenuptial agreements as decisions such as having children or a change in career could have an incredible effect on the outcome of their divorce settlement if they were to decide to dissolve their marriage. Many matrimonial attorneys are anticipating a potential rise in post-nuptial agreements, as they would be allowed to redraft marital contracts every few years to account for possible circumstantial changes in their lives. The new law could have adverse effects on both the wealthier as well as the non-moneyed spouse. The non-moneyed spouses could do potential harm to their finances if the agreement did not impact their compensation if they were to dissolve their marriage. The wealthier spouse however could potentially lose assets if agreed upon so in the prenuptial to protect their pension or for a waiver of alimony payments. With the drastic effect these changes could have on the use of prenuptial agreements attorneys are waiting to see the backlash from the recent law and the potential effect it could have on their practices. In today's world, where divorce is more the rule than the exception, you should be aware of your exposure in the event things do not work out. If you see a need for a pre-nuptial agreement or want to make sure the one you have is still effective as laws change, you should consult with an experienced NJ family lawyer. For more information about pre-nuptial agreements, post-nuptial agreements, palimony agreements, cohabitation agreements, child custody, visitation, divorce, child support or any other type of family law matter in New Jersey please visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.