Showing posts with label matrimonial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label matrimonial. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Trial Court Must Set Forth Basis of Need For Final Restraining Order in NJ
Restraining orders began as a resource to provide necessary protection for battered women and children. Since their inception, the nature of the call for domestic violence orders have changed. Sadly, domestic violence orders are used in the NJ Courts to the benefit of the accusing party as leverage in matrimonial actions.
As a result of the misuse of restraining orders, Judges are required to set forth specific findings of fact regarding the events giving rise to the allegations, surrounding circumstances, any past domestic issues issues of the parties or one of them and the totality of the circumstances of the parties. Each domestic violence dispute involves a very specific fact pattern which should be fully set forth in Court prior to the Judge making a decision in the matter. In the event a defendant is unable to properly articulate a response to allegations, the Court should make every effort to obtain from the defendant a specific and accurate response as to allegations. In no event should a Judge simply interpret ambiguous statements of either party without further inquiry.
If you are involved in a domestic violence matter, you should consult an experienced criminal law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on domestic violence, criminal law 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.
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Removal of a Child From Their Native Country Under the Laws of NJ
The Hague Convention is an international law into which countries may enter for the purposes of international cooperation. The Hague Convention has been signed by 89 countries. Haiti, Nepal and the Russian Federation have signed but not ratified. The Hague Convention has sections pertaining to international abduction of a child. One sections requires the return of a child wrongfully removed from their habitual residence as long as the action for return is filed within one year of the date the child is removed. Any application filed after one year requires the court to consider whether the child is well-settled in the new country of residence.
Exceptions to the one year timeframe include a showing that the abducting parent has taken steps to conceal the child's whereabouts from the parent seeking return or there is grave risk of harm to the child by the receiving state or family members therein.
There are defenses which may be asserted by the parent who removed the child from their native country. In the event the other parent consented to removal, the court will not force a return of the child to their habitual residence. If the child is old enough to make such a decision, the child may decide whether they wish to stay in the country to which they have been removed or return to their habitual residence. Finally, if there is grave risk of physical or psychological harm to the child in their new residence, the court will order the return of the child to their habitual residence.
This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are seeking to remove a child from or have a child returned to another state or territory, you should consult an experienced family law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on relocating with children, child custody, child support, enforcement, modification, alimony, divorce, dissolution of civil union or domestic partnership, custody or other family law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.
Labels:
abduction,
best interests,
child,
child custody,
civil union,
custody,
divorce,
domestic partnership,
family,
matrimonial,
parent,
removal,
residence
Monday, August 20, 2012
Modification of Alimony- What is Required in NJ?
A change in employment or earnings of a spouse, either the payor or the payee, is not necessarily enough for a modification of spousal support. The court requires a "prima facie showing of changed circumstances" to consider modification of support. Prima facie is latin for "at first sight" or "on its face." What this means if that the change must appear, to the court, to be significant and in need of further consideration at a hearing.
The change in circumstances required for a modification of support is one that substantially impairs the ability of a spouse to support himself or herself. This means a long-term change, not simply a reduction in income during a slow period in a spouse's business cycle. The court also considers the earning capacity or potential earning power of the spouse, not simply whether they are using the ability or the power. This means if the court finds the spouse can earn more, the court will impute to the spouse the income the court believes they can make. A long-term change in the economy, a certain industry leaving the area or a long-term disability are examples of reasons the court will consider modification of alimony.
This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are seeking a modification of support or someone is seeking to modify a support order imposed on you, you should consult an experienced family law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on alimony, divorce, dissolution of civil union or domestic partnership, custody, child support or other family law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)