On or about February 1, 2007, Actress Anne Heche was served with divorce papers from her husband of over five years, cameraman and “stay-at-home dad”, Coley Laffoon, who filed “irreconcilable differences”. However, it has been reported, but not confirmed, that the split was due to a budding relationship with Ms. Heche’s “Men in Trees” costar, James Tupper.
After seven years of marriage, Actress, Laura Jeanne “Reese Witherspoon” filed for divorce from Actor, Matthew “Ryan Phillippe” on November 8, 2006, on the grounds of “irreconcilable differences”. However, it has been circulated Mr. Phillippe had an affair with a co-star, was excessively partying, and indulged in drugs.
Ms. Witherspoon is seeking primary physical custody of their two children (mentioned below), with visitation rights to Mr. Phillippe, and sole use of the family residence. She asks the Court that Mr. Phillippe be denied spousal support. [Ms. Witherspoon is represented by Robert Kaufman.] 
So, you are in the middle of a divorce and you think your spouse is cheating on you….should you start snooping about your spouse’s belongings? Perhaps you have the sudden urge to go through your spouse’s email….can you do this? The computer was purchased during the marriage and belongs to the both of you. The internet service is paid from joint accounts. Why wouldn’t you be able to view your spouse’s email?
A recent New Jersey Law Journal article addresses just this issue, Beware the Smoking E-mail, Darren M. Gelber, 11-13-2006. http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/index.jsp
Let’s say you and your spouse want a divorce but you don’t want to hire attorneys. The two of you feel that you can draft a reasonable property settlement agreement and work with the county court clerk regarding procedural matters.
Beware of your future. Your ex-spouse may challenge the validity of the property settlement agreement, although it will be difficult. New Jersey Courts have held it is a fundamental principle that “the settlement of litigation ranks high in our public policy.” Jannarone v. W.T. Co., 65 N.J. Super. 476, 168 A.2d72 (App. Div.) certif.. denied, 35 N.J. 61, 171 A.2d 147 (1962).
Courts encourage parties to settle. Therefore, Courts are not likely to overturn agreements entered into by the parties voluntarily.
Is a person you care about going through a divorce? Do you think that person, not only needs an attorney, but needs someone to act in his/her best interest due to his/her cognitive disability?
If this person in your life is mentally incapacitated, it is likely his/her attorney will petition the Court for appointment of a guardian ad litem. A guardian ad litem protects, preserves and secures the interests of the individual that is mentally incapacitated.
As as initial matter, it is important to note the New Jersey court system encourages parties to a divorce to settle. The Courts prefer when parties can resolve financial and custodial issues without judicial intervention. The terms of settlement are embodied in a Property Settlement Agreement, also known as a Marital Settlement Agreement.
Oftentimes, a party files a motion for modification of a specific term in the property settlement agreement. New Jersey Courts permit this. The Courts allow parties to file post-judgment (post-divorce) motions for modifications of property settlement agreements (contracts).
In this respect, the contract, property settlement agreement, is treated vastly different in the family context than in a business or employment context. In the latter, there is very litttle room for change.
UNDEREMPLOYMENT
In some circumstances, a party who is obligated to pay alimony and/or child support may change their employment, earn substantially less than before, and seek to have either obligation decreased on the basis of decreased income.
The New Jersey Courts will not overlook this event; it is not a matter of happenstance. In fact, New Jersey Courts may impute income to the payor up to the amount the payor earned at his/her prior employment.
In Mowery, the Court held it is not merely the present earnings of the payor, but the potential earning capacity that is the essence of this factor. Mowery v. Mowery, 38 N.J. Super. 92 102 (App. Div. 1955).
New Jersey Family Law Blog