Domestic Violence And Living Together After Divorce Is Filed

Domestic violence can sometimes occur at the end of a marriage when parties continue to share a residence while tensions are very high over custody of the children and division of property. In one such matter, while a 25 year marriage of which 2 children were born was ending in divorce, the parties continued to reside together in martial residence. The parties maintained separate bedrooms but this did not provide adequate distance to prevent frequent interaction and the continuation of tension between them. At some point an altercation occurred and both parties were granted temporary restraining orders (TROs) against the other party. Each party then sought a final restraining order (FRO) against the other. Each party entered into the bedroom of the other during the event and both parties sustained physical injuries. Both parties also and provided ample testimony, including the testimony of the parties' son, in regard to the events and issues. Although the just found Plaintiff's testimony not to be credible, neither party was granted a FRO. The judge found that, in spite of the testimony and proof of injuries, there was no proof of harassment or assault of the level needed to give rise to protection afforded by a FRO. A final restraining order can impact your ability to see your children, prevent you from returning to your residence, deprive you of your right to own weapons, impact your job or ability to obtain employment and holds a social stigma. If you are facing or levying domestic violence charges, you should consult with an experienced domestic violence attorney. For more information regarding domestic violence, assault, divorce or dissolution, custody, parenting time and visitation, adoption or other criminal or 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.

Domestic Violence Charges Not A Right To Counsel in NJ

The NJ Appellate Division recently held, in D.N. v. K.M./K.M. v. D.N, that neither plaintiffs nor defendants in a domestic violence matter who cannot afford counsel are entitled to the representation of counsel at the expense of the state. The Appellate Division rendered this ruling even though one significant consequence of domestic violence is the immediate loss of weapons with the potential of permanent loss of weapons and the inability to purchase, possess or carry weapons in the future in the event of a guilty finding. In spite of legislation and a lean toward the removal of guns from the hands of the people, the right to keep and bear arms remains a constitutional right at this time. The Appellate Division offered the reasoning that, unlike other criminal actions, domestic violence is a matter of the victim against the defendant rather than the full force of the state of New Jersey against the defendant. The court further reasoned that domestic violence laws are curative in nature and designed to stop further acts of domestic violence. However, before the court can make a finding of domestic violence, it must find that an offense such as harassment, stalking or assault occurred. If you are facing domestic violence charges, you should consult an experienced criminal law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on assault, harassment, stalking, terroristic threats, child custody, domestic violence, parenting time/visitation, dissolution of a civil union, marriage or domestic partnership, alimony, palimony or other family and criminal 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.