New Jersey Family Law Blog

In New Jersey a Child Support Agreement that Deviates from the Guidelines is Superseded by the State when the Payee is a Recipient of TANF

August 2, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Let’s say you and your ex have an agreement, whether verbal or written, that you will pay to your ex $300 in child support, when according to the Guidelines, you should be paying $800. Well, this is obviously agreeable to the payor.

Your obligation will certainly change if your ex becomes a recipient of TANF, i.e. welfare. TANF stands for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.

New Jersey: Termination of Parental Rights

July 10, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Baby%20Hands.JPG

In a recent New Jersey case, a mother’s parental rights were reinstated after the New Jersey State Supreme Court found that DYFS failed to prove the mother was unwilling and unable to eliminate threats of harm (in this case, the presence of the child’s father).

The Division of Youth and Family Services, more commonly known as DYFS, files for termination of parental rights. By clear and convincing evidence, DYFS must show the following: (1) the child’s safety, health, or development is endangered by the parental relationship; (2) the parent is unwilling or unable to eliminate the harm facing the child; (3) DYFS made reasonable efforts to provide services to help the parent; and (4) termination will not do more harm than good.

Custody – David Hasselhoff

June 21, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

On June 15, 2007, former Baywatch star and singer, David Hasselhoff won full and physical custody of his two teenage daughters, 14 year-old Hayley and 17 year-old Taylor-Ann.

His ex-wife, Pamela Bach, has been granted alternate weekends and on Wednesday nights for dinner.

Hasselhoff%20%26%20Bach.jpg

New Jersey Court Orders Retroactive Increase in Child Support Where Motion was Never Filed

June 17, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Hamilton v. Mamroud, N.J.Super.A.D. 2007(unpublished opinion).

The parties had one son together. They divorced agreeing to joint custody with mother having primary residence.

Eleven years after the divorce, in November of 2001, the Middlesex County Board of Social Services notified both parties that either could seek a review of child support. The mother notified the board that she was interested in the review.

Thereafter, the father was notified by the Board that it was gathering his financial information from his employer. The board filed a motion to increase support on November 7, 2003, and then again on November 25, 2003 asking the court to make the increase retroactive to November 25, 2001(the date of the original notice).

Divorce – Danny Bonaduce & Gretchen Bonaduce

June 15, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

On April 10, 2007, Gretchen Bonaduce filed for divorce from former “Partridge Family” child star, and now radio and TV host, Dante Daniel (“Danny”) Bonaduce after 17 years of marriage, citing irreconcilable differences.

According to the divorce papers, Gretchen is seeking legal and physical custody of their 6-year old son, Count Dante Jean-Michael V. and 12-year old daughter, Countess Isabella Michaela of the marriage, with visitation to Danny.

Danny%20Bonaduce%20pic.jpg

New Jersey Appellate Division Reverses Summary Judgment in Same Sex Equitable Distribution Case

June 5, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Gruber v. Rixford, N.J.Super.A.D., 2007 (unpublished opinion).

A same sex couple purchased a townhouse together, in which title was held solely in defendant’s name as was the mortgage on the property. The plaintiff expended approximately $55,000 toward the purchase of the townhouse.

After the parties broke up, the plaintiff alleged that the townhouse was a joint asset, subject to equitable distribution, giving him a 50% interest. In support of plaintiff’s position, he alleged the parties had a verbal agreement that his name would be placed on the deed.

The defendant offered to pay plaintiff $93,000 as his share of the home and testified that plaintiff accepted this pay-off. Plaintiff acknowledged that the conversation took place but denied that he accepted the offer.

The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

Battle Over Nearly $630,000.00 in Counsel Fees

May 31, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Larry Birkhead, the biological father of Dannielynn, is not entirely done fighting. Debra Opri, Esq., Mr. Birkhead’s former attorney alleges she was not paid $620,492.84 in fees resulting from her representation of Mr. Birkhead during his custody dispute.

On May 29, 2007, Ms. Opri allegedly filed court documents with the Los Angeles Superior Court for all of her travel expenses, expensive lavish dinners, and even for expenses associated with her husband, whom traveled with her, in addition to her “usual hourly rate” of $475.00 per hour, court filing fees, subpoena costs, deposition costs, accounting and appraisal fees, etc. Ms. Opri stated “legal services entailed hundreds of hours of work”.

Birkhead%20being%20sued%20pic.jpg

Divorce – Joey Buttafuoco’s Second Wife Files For Divorce

May 25, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

On May 4, 2007, Evanka Buttafuoco filed a divorce petition against Joey Buttafuoco citing “irreconcilable differences”. Evanka listed the couple’s assets to be “consumer debt only”.

When asked about his divorce, Mr. Buttafuoco told The Post “All I can say is two words: I’m devastated. That’s all I can say. I’m very sad.”

Joey and Evanka were married on March 5, 2007. No children are shared by the couple.

Custody Battle – Bobby Brown Sues Whitney Houston

May 18, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

On April 26, 2007, Bobby Brown filed a lawsuit against ex-wife Whitney Houston in an attempt to change the custody terms as to their 14 year-old daughter, Bobbi Kristina. In addition to the shared custody, he is seeking child support and spousal support. A court date has been set for June 15, 2007.

Whitney%20Houston%20kissing%20bye.jpg Bobby%20Brown.jpg

New Jersey: Final Restraining Order Reversed on Grounds that Complaint was Insufficient

May 4, 2007 | Kearns Rotolo Law

Loveland v. Hauke, N.J.Super.A.D., 2007 (unpublished opinion).

This is a domestic violence case where the plaintiff alleged defendant acted with a purpose or intent to harass.

The plaintiff, in attempting to explain her fear, attempted to testify to incidents that were not outlined in her complaint. In fact, the plaintiff informed a police officer that there were no prior instances of domestic violence. Therefore, the plaintiff was not allowed to testify to any incidents before the incident at issue.

The Trial Court issued a Final Restraining Order. Defendant appealed.