Articles Posted in Child support

daughterAfter a recent divorce judgment in New Jersey, a husband appealed, arguing for reversal. He claimed that the wrong income had been used to calculate alimony and that his actual earnings were lower. He also claimed his wife committed perjury when she testified he didn’t pay for the family’s expenses and misrepresented how much time he spent with the kids, including the overnights he spent. He also argued for the disqualification of the trial judge because he’d talked about his impending retirement with the wife’s attorney at the end of the default hearing.

The couple had married in 2000 and had three kids, all of whom were minors at the time of the divorce. The wife sued for divorce in 2015. The couple didn’t own much property beyond their home, which was in foreclosure, as well as cars and limited retirement accounts.

The wife and her attorney came to a default hearing, at which the husband didn’t appear. The hearing addressed a number of issues that were in the wife’s notice of proposed final judgment. She was seeking sole legal and residential custody of their kids and half of their assets. She also wanted to have open durational alimony, to have the kids’ medical insurance be paid by the husband, and to be compensated for a number of other costs. She only submitted foreclosure correspondence, pay stubs, and documents subpoenaed from the husband’s employer about his earnings. The mother’s case information statement wasn’t put into evidence, although the judge referenced it.

Continue reading

stethoscopeIn a recent New Jersey child support decision, the defendant appealed reconsideration of an order that required him to pay a $5,000 health insurance deductible for his five children. The mother and father had divorced in 2007. Their final divorce judgment set forth that the father would have to maintain the five kids on his medical insurance after the marriage was dissolved. The mother was ordered to pay the first $250 of unreimbursed medical expenses for each child every year, but after that, the expenses would be shared proportionately, such that the mother would pay for 40% of the amounts over $250 each year, per child, and the father would be responsible for 60% of the amounts over $250 each year, per child.

In 2015, the former couple came before the family division judge after the father moved to compel the mother to apply for health insurance for the kids in New Jersey. The mother filed a cross-motion, demanding that the father continue providing health insurance through United Health Care or a comparable insurer. She argued that the father hadn’t gotten coverage through United Health Care but instead through Care Connect, which wasn’t contracted with the State of New Jersey. She complained that because of this, she had to take the kids to New York for medical care.

The judge contacted the insurer by telephone. Based on the father’s claim that the maximum out of pocket on the former policy was $5,000, the court found out from the insurer that comparable coverage could be as low as $392 or as high as $1,196 each year. The parent providing coverage would receive the bill. The court ordered the mom to apply for insurance through United Health Care for comparable coverage to the former United Health Care coverage with the $5,000 deductible. The father was ordered to pay by advancing the mother the amount of three months of premiums at a time. He also had to pay 60% of medical bills.

Continue reading

child's faceIn a recent New Jersey custody case, a mother appealed from an order on parenting time and child support. The father cross-appealed. The couple dated for about three years and had one child.

They agreed to share joint legal custody through two consent orders. The father was to pay the mother $100 per week. The next year, they worked out a custody agreement that addressed all of the issues, except two. They agreed that they would have joint legal custody and that neither party was to be designated the parent of primary residence. They also created a parenting time schedule.

The parenting time schedule required the father to pick the child up on Thursday morning and bring the child back on Friday afternoon, and it required the mother to pick the child up on Tuesday and have the child for the weekend, starting on Friday. The couple couldn’t agree on overnights or child support, and these were to be decided by the court. The court heard arguments in 2016, and the next day, the court provided an order that found the parties shared a 50/50 parenting time schedule and found that it was appropriate to deviate from the New Jersey Child Support Guidelines, deny their requests for child support, and direct the parties to share in the child’s health care.

Continue reading

nienke-2-1370519-e1508189157797In a recent New Jersey appellate decision, a couple that married in 1999 had three kids. After a divorce trial, the father was awarded custody of the kids and the mother had to pay child support for the three kids. The father  had to pay the mother$300 each week in rehabilitative alimony.

The father moved to terminate alimony based on a change in circumstances. This motion was denied. Later the father tried against to end alimony and increase child support, but the wife filed a for primary residential custody of two of the kids, enforcement of the alimony order, and recalculation of support for the kids. The judge reduced the alimony payments and increased child support among other things.

The judge ordered a hearing on child supporting, parenting time, custody and alimony. In his order, the judge found nothing had changed significantly since the divorce judgment. The judge did find the plaintiff improved her economic situation by finishing her education, getting her degree and getting a job, but that this didn’t dispose of the custody issue. The judge also noted that the plaintiff had a difficult relationship with her oldest daughter and that the couple was reluctant to split the children up. The plaintiff’s motion for change of residential custody and ordered child support based on the guidelines’ sole parenting worksheet.

Continue reading

childIn a recent New Jersey divorce decision, a wife appealed from post-judgment orders. The case arose after the parties got married and then divorced almost 15 years later. They had one child and entered into a marital settlement agreement that set forth the equitable distribution of assets, alimony, and child-related issues like child custody, child support, and visitation.

In 2015, the ex-husband moved the court for various remedies, including terminating or reducing his alimony obligation to his ex-wife. The ex-wife opposed and cross-moved. The court ordered the former couple to economic mediation and established temporary child support from the ex-wife to the ex-husband in the amount of $40 per week. The former couple went to mediation but couldn’t resolve their differences.

In September 2015, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking specified financial documents from the defendant. The defendant opposed the motion.

graduateIn a recent New Jersey appellate case, a mother and father divorced in 1993 and executed a settlement agreement that gave them joint legal custody. The mother would have primary residential custody of their children and would receive $630 per month in child support for the kids. The parties agreed to contribute to the kids’ college expenses. Many years later, the father’s child support obligation was reduced to $150 per week.

After their daughter graduated from college, the father moved to emancipate her and to terminate child support for her and recalculate child support for his son. He claimed she was 23 and could support herself, since she worked part-time.

The mother made a motion to deny the request to emancipate, asking for an increase in child support for their son. She argued that the daughter would go to graduate school at a university and would be interning, and therefore she couldn’t earn income during that time. She asked for the father to pay certain expenses, including taxes attributed to a tuition benefit. She also asked that he pay more child support for their son, since the son’s Supplemental Security Income was going to be reduced.

Continue reading

dogIn a recent New Jersey alimony case, a father appealed from three post-judgment orders requiring him to pay additional alimony and additional child support from 2010-2013 in line with a marital settlement agreement. The couple had divorced in 2010 after a marriage that lasted 15 years and resulted in two kids, who were teens at the time of divorce.

The parties were divorced in 2010 after 15 years of marriage and two children, both now teenagers. The father was a high-earning specialist in financial services. He’d been laid off but also gotten hired again at the same or higher level of compensation. The mother was a product manager earning more than $80,000 by the end of the marriage.

The mother and father were represented by attorneys during the divorce, and the attorneys had negotiated the marital settlement agreement, which was more than 30 pages long. There were 10 paragraphs about alimony and child support. These included a provision in which the husband would pay base child support for the calendar year and also pay additional child support of 8% from the gross amount of the bonus, incentive award, deferred compensation, or other form of compensation until the kids were emancipated.

Continue reading

teenagerN.J.S.A. 2A:17-56.67 automatically terminates support when a child reaches age 19 and became effective on February 1, 2017. However, couples may still negotiate settlement agreements that will be incorporated by their divorce judgment, in which they decide to treat emancipation of their children differently.

In a recent unpublished decision, a mother appealed from an order emancipating her 19-year-old son and terminating the father’s child support duties. The couple had married in 1986 and after having three children, divorced in 2006.

Their divorce judgment incorporated a settlement agreement that included a provision on emancipation, stating that it would occur when the children completed high school or upon reaching 18 years of age if a child didn’t go to college. Emancipation wouldn’t occur until after the child finished four years of college if the child went to college, as long as the child pursued it with reasonable diligence.

Continue reading

daddy-reading-behind-1432160-e1491948926277In a recent New Jersey appeal, a father asked the court to review a trial court order that denied his motion to reduce his child support payments, denied him vacation parenting time, and ordered him and his son to participate in reunification therapy as a prerequisite to parenting time.

The couple separated after a nine-year relationship during which they had a child. The plaintiff/mother was a store manager. The defendant/father was a French citizen who’d lived in the country since age 25, and who worked as an IT manager. The defendant and plaintiff visited the defendant’s parents in France each year.

The couple’s relationship began to have problems in 2011, and the defendant claimed it was because the plaintiff began seeing a coworker romantically. He traveled to French Polynesia in 2012, and the plaintiff didn’t go. They separated the next year, and entered into a consent order that granted joint legal custody to both of them with primary residential custody to the plaintiff and parenting time to the defendant. The order stated that if the father wanted to travel internationally with their child, he’d need to give the mother 20 days notice. The court also set a weekly child support obligation that the father would have to pay.

Continue reading

childrenIn the unpublished opinion of Maynard v. Michna, the Superior Court of New Jersey considered child support obligations for parents supporting children who were born during multiple relationships. The defendant father appealed, and the plaintiff mother cross-appealed.

The parents met in California while working for the same company. The defendant lived in Georgia at the time, while the mother lived in California. Both were divorced with a special needs child. The mother and her older child moved to the defendant’s Georgia house. The mother decided New Jersey schools were better for her son’s special needs, and she relocated. The couple continued long distance dating, and they had a child together. He was born in 2011 in New Jersey. Four months later, they concluded their relationship.

The defendant paid child support to the child voluntarily. The plaintiff sued for sole custody, child support, and contribution toward their son’s financial expenses. The court held an evidentiary hearing on these issues. At the hearing, the parents agreed that they would share joint legal custody and that the child would live with the plaintiff. The defendant waived his parenting time. The parents established a process whereby the defendant would pay for activity expenses greater than $150 per event that weren’t payable through child support. They also agreed to alternate the tax dependency exemption.

Continue reading