A child-custody litigant is asking New Jersey's Supreme Court to set aside an order that he pay $51,000 to a parenting coordinator — most of it for time she spent responding to his grievances about her performance.
March 10, 2011 at 05:31 PM
1 minute read
A child-custody litigant is asking New Jersey’s Supreme Court to set aside an order that he pay $51,000 to a parenting coordinator — most of it for time she spent responding to his grievances about her performance.
Moses Segal claims in his petition for certification, in Segal v. Lynch , A-2134-09, that such charges were not contemplated by the Supreme Court when it launched the pilot Parenting Coordinator Program in 2007.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
