Led by Brian G. Paul, Esq.
Certified Matrimonial Law Attorney | Co-Managing Partner
Szaferman, Lakind, Blumstein & Blader, P.C.
Supreme Court Cases
Cardali v. Cardali (2023):Cohabitation & Alimony Termination. The Supreme Court clarified the standard for investigating cohabitation when an agreement allows it to terminate alimony. The Court held that a payor can establish a prima facie case with evidence of a marriage-like relationship without needing to show financial entanglement. This initial showing is sufficient to compel discovery and enforce the agreement's terms.
Moynihan v. Lynch (2022):Palimony Agreement Validity. A couple signed a written "palimony" agreement without lawyers. The Supreme Court declared the law requiring mandatory attorney review unconstitutional, affirming that consenting adults have the right to enter into enforceable support agreements without counsel.
Bisbing v. Bisbing (2017):Child Relocation Standard Changed. A parent with shared custody sought to move out of state with the children. The Supreme Court replaced the old, more permissive standard, ruling that all such relocation requests must now be decided based on the child's best interests.
Major v. Maguire (2016):Grandparent Visitation Rights. After being denied access to their grandchild, grandparents had to show that the child would be harmed by the lack of visitation. The Supreme Court affirmed this high standard, ensuring that a parent’s fundamental right to raise their child is protected unless there is a clear showing of harm.
In re Adoption by J.E.V. & D.G.V. (2016):Right to Counsel in Private Adoptions. The Supreme Court ruled that in life-altering cases, indigent parents who cannot afford an attorney have a constitutional right to appointed counsel, ensuring fairness in private adoption proceedings.
Gnall v. Gnall (2015):Alimony Duration Factors. The Court rejected an informal rule that marriages over 15 years automatically result in permanent alimony. Courts must weigh all statutory factors, not just length of marriage, to determine a fair alimony duration.
Maeker v. Ross (2014):Oral Palimony Agreements Enforced. The Supreme Court held that the 2010 law requiring written palimony agreements was not retroactive, protecting rights of individuals who relied on oral promises made before the statute.
Fawzy v. Fawzy (2009):Arbitration of Child Custody. The Supreme Court confirmed that parents may use private arbitration for custody disputes but mandated safeguards like a full record and judicial review to protect children’s best interests.
Appellate Division Cases (Published)
S.W. v. G.M. (2020):Marital Lifestyle Must Be Quantified for Alimony Awards. Reversed an alimony award because the trial court failed to quantify the marital lifestyle, as required by Crews v. Crews. The decision reinforced that a reduced budget during litigation is not a substitute for the actual marital standard of living.
Lombardi v. Lombardi (2016):Savings as a Component of Alimony. The Appellate Division held that when saving was part of the marital lifestyle, a “savings component” must be included in alimony awards to maintain the marital standard of living.
Marshak v. Weser (2007):Out-of-State College Support Orders. The Appellate Division reversed a New Jersey order requiring a father divorced in Pennsylvania to pay college expenses, holding that UIFSA barred NJ from imposing obligations not recognized under Pennsylvania law.
Appellate Division Cases (Unpublished)
S.W. v. G.M. (IV) (2024):Alimony & The Law-of-the-Case. The firm successfully defended a quantified marital lifestyle of $1.52 million per year. The Appellate Division repeatedly enforced this as the “law-of-the-case,” ultimately ordering $54,604 in monthly alimony and directing payment of over $2.2 million in arrears.
Weidel v. Weidel (2021):Unenforceable Prenuptial Agreement & Marital Lifestyle. In a complex, high-asset divorce, the firm first secured a summary judgment victory invalidating a purported prenuptial agreement and a coercive mid-marriage amendment due to critical flaws, including the lack of a signed copy, no financial disclosure, and no independent counsel for the wife. On a subsequent cross-appeal, we successfully reversed a trial court’s improper calculation of temporary support. The Appellate Division agreed that the court erred by ignoring the established marital lifestyle, reaffirming that the marital standard of living is the essential yardstick for all spousal support determinations.
D.A.M. v. M.J.M. (2020):Validity of a Marriage. After 20 years of marriage, a husband filed for divorce and argued the marriage was legally void from the start because their religious ceremony occurred before they obtained a marriage license—a clear violation of statute. The trial court and Appellate Division rejected this argument. The court applied the doctrine of quasi-estoppel, ruling that a party who holds themselves out to the world as married for decades (filing joint taxes, owning joint property) cannot suddenly repudiate the marriage to gain a strategic advantage in a divorce. This decision ensures that fairness and justice prevail over technical, procedural defects.
Proctor v. Proctor (2011):Cohabitation & Alimony Termination. The firm represented a former husband seeking to terminate alimony based on his ex-wife’s long-term cohabitation. After the ex-wife admitted to cohabitation but disputed its financial impact, the trial court found overwhelming evidence of economic interdependence, including joint properties, bank accounts, and a lifestyle that surpassed the marital standard. The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s decision to terminate alimony, holding that once a prima facie case of cohabitation is made, the burden shifts to the dependent spouse to prove a lack of economic benefit—a burden she failed to meet.
Pizi v. Bolam (2004):Deferred Compensation as Income for Support. The court ruled that deferred compensation (restricted stock vesting post-divorce) counts as income for support purposes, denying an ex-husband’s bid to reduce his obligations.
Morse v. Morse (2007):Denial of Alimony Reversed. The Appellate Division reversed a denial of alimony, holding that equitable distribution and inheritance do not disqualify a spouse from support; courts must analyze statutory factors and lifestyle.
Jackson v. Jackson (2009):Limited-Duration Alimony & Debt. The Appellate Division affirmed an eight-year limited-duration alimony award and the allocation of marital debts, deferring to the trial judge’s credibility findings.
J.C. v. J.M. (2006):Domestic Violence & Restraining Orders. The Appellate Division affirmed a final restraining order after a campaign of stalking and harassment, rejecting the defendant’s procedural challenges.
D.W. v. P.W. (Weaver) (2009):Change of Custody due to Abuse. The Appellate Division upheld a custody transfer to the father based on the mother’s mental health issues and abusive behavior, prioritizing the children’s safety.