Support Magistrate Allen Hochberg
Wife DS sought to modify the parties' divorce, and modify a later so-ordered stipulation. She argued fraud in the inducement which allegedly resulted in unfair child support payments for the parties' children. Husband JK moved to dismiss the petition arguing estoppel and laches claiming DS took all the benefits of the past agreements for the last nearly seven years, but now sought to change the financial terms previously agreed to and fulfilled by JK. The court found for the intervening time period, nearly 14 years, since the divorce and stipulation there were no claims of unfairness or fraud. The court also noted JK was paying all of the children's expenses for college, as well as child support, and found DS's circular offer of proof insufficient to form the predicate requiring a hearing on the issue of fraud. The court concluded the fact DS was unhappy with the "longitudinal outcome of the divorce, did not give rise to a claim of fraud," stating DS failed in her burden of proof to show an issue of fact to defeat JK's dismissal motion. Therefore, the court ruled that upon a search of the record, there appeared nothing which compelled a full hearing, and granted JK's motion.
