• Kelly v. Kelly

    Publication Date: 2019-04-24
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Appellate Division
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: A-2859-17T3

    Plaintiff appealed the denial of her request for a plenary hearing to determine custody issues.

  • A.P.T. v. L.C.T.

    Publication Date: 2019-04-24
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Appellate Division
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: A-4440-17T1

    Defendant appealed from a post-judgment order that granted plaintiff enforcement of the parties' Property Settlement Agreement and denied defendant's motion for relief from the PSA.

  • L.M.B. v. M.E.B.

    Publication Date: 2019-04-23
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Appellate Division
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: A-0846-17T2

    The parties' cross-appealed the order requiring defendant to pay alimony under the MSA based on imputed earnings.

  • Drobnjak v. Drobnjak

    Publication Date: 2019-04-23
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Appellate Division
    Judge: Per Curiam
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: A-1285-17T2

    In the post-judgment matrimonial action defendant appealed from an order that granted plaintiff's motion to enforce litigant's rights and that denied defendant's cross-motion to vacate the parties final judgment of divorce.

  • County of San Diego Department of Child Support Services v. C.A.

    Publication Date: 2019-04-23
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeal, 4th District
    Judge: Acting Presiding Justice Huffman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D074172

    Mother obligated to pay child support to relative awarded full legal and physical custody of minor child

  • Mountain v. Mountain

    Publication Date: 2019-04-22
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Connecticut Appellate Court
    Judge: Judge Sheldon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: AC 41041

    Court Affirms Trial Courts Denial Of Motion To Modify Unallocated Alimony And Child Support

  • Cyganovich v. Cyganovich

    Publication Date: 2019-04-22
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Connecticut Appellate Court
    Judge: Judge Alvord
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: AC 41445

    Court Finds Defendant In Dissolution Of Marriage Not Entitled To Split Custody Child Support Obligation In Shared Custody Situation

  • In re: B.J.Z.

    Publication Date: 2019-04-22
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Bender
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0456

    Involuntary termination of parental rights affirmed where trial court could admit statements setting forth older children's preferences for termination and where evidence supported finding that parent was unlikely to remedy conditions for removal. Orders of the trial court affirmed.

  • In the Interest of: T.M.A., a minor

    Publication Date: 2019-04-22
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Strassburger
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 19-0452

    Juvenile court could adjudicate minor dependent where record demonstrated conflict between child and parent such that child refused to return to parent's home and the "grandparent" child was living with had no way to provide for child's medical needs. Order of the juvenile court affirmed.

  • N.T. v. H.T.

    Publication Date: 2019-04-22
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeal, 4th District
    Judge: Justice Fybel
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: G055885

    Spouse's alleged violations of temporary restraining order improperly dismissed as mere "technical" violations not warranting DVRO