NJSBA Family Law Section

 View Only
  • 1.  adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-16-2018 10:50 AM

     

    I have a plenary hearing scheduled next week on my client's request to terminate alimony. The ex-wife is self represented. My client receives a service-related, 100% disability benefit from the VA primarily due to PTSD which has impaired his mental functioning, in my opinion.

    When I filed my motion, my client stated that he had conveyed his interest in the former marital to his ex-wife and adult son, who goes by the same name but with a slightly different spelling ( Stephen v. Steven) in 2006, but received no consideration.   It is a prayer for relief asking to be compensated. In her reply papers, the ex-wife produced a HUD statement showing that a disbursement was made to him for $114,000. When I asked him about this, he said he must've gotten the money but forgot about it. As a result, I withdrew that prayer for relief.

    In doing trial prep yesterday, I came across some documents which suggested to me that he had not in fact receive the money. I am in the process of trying to retrieve the front and back of the check. The ex-wife and son are extremely hostile to my client so I could see them doing this. Since father and son have similar names, it would have been easy for the son to deposit the check into his own account.

    The property is held as tenants in common so I need to add the son as a direct defendant. Since this is post judgment, I cannot very well file an amended complaint. I do not want to start a separate action since there would be so much overlap in the testimony between the two cases, they would have to be joined anyway. I want to file a motion as soon as possible but what relief do I ask for?

    Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

     

     

    Arlene F. Albino, Esq.

    Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers

    Certified Matrimonial Law Attorney

     

    Albino & Clark, LLC

    Attorneys at Law

    10 Poplar Tree Lane

    Sparta, New Jersey 07871

    (973) 729-3888

    (973) 729-4167 Facsimile

     

    Confidentiality Note:

    This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information.  No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mis-transmission. If you receieve this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient.

     



  • 2.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-16-2018 11:08 AM

    Isn't this a criminal theft by the son?

    ccs






  • 3.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-16-2018 03:08 PM

    Absolutely, if I can get the cancelled check

     






  • 4.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-17-2018 07:20 AM
    Given the overlap, even if a new action was filed, it may be consolidated with the one pending per R. 4:38 .

    You can move to reinstate the prior prayer for relief as well as file a Third Party Complaint per R. 4:8 against the son to impose an equitable lien against any assets the son has to collect the amount that was paid to him but should have been paid to your client per the HUD.

    It also sounds like there are legal causes of action against the son, ex-wife, and even perhaps the settlement agent from the sale of the former marital home (and maybe even the bank that honored the check, depending on in whose account it was deposited and the facts and circumstances of the deposit) (breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, misappropriation of funds, fraudulent check paid/given, stolen check (conversion)). That said, if anyone requests a jury trial on the legal counts, there are going to be case management issues as to whether the equitable claims are going to be tried first in front of the judge or the legal issues are going to be first tried by jury, and you'll have basically two trials anyway.

    Also, the adverse parties may raise statute of limitations issues that may be alleviated by the discovery rule.

    Rajeh A. Saadeh
    The Law Office of Rajeh A. Saadeh, L.L.C.
    50 Division Street
    Somerville, N.J. 08876
    p: 908.864.7884

     
    IMPORTANT CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
    This message (including any/all attachments) is being sent by an attorney and is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This message (including any/all attachments) contains information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential, and/or otherwise legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, and/or disseminate this message and/or any part of it (including any/all attachments). If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete and destroy any/all copies of this message (including any/all attachments).

    DISCLAIMER REGARDING REPRESENTATION
    This message (including any/all attachments) does not establish an attorney-client relationship between you and me.  An attorney-client relationship between you and me can only be established by personal contact and requires (i) my prior written consent to act as your attorney and (ii) your and my execution of a written retainer agreement.
     
    LEGAL ADVICE/SOLICITATION
    This message (including any/all attachments) is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute solicitation or legal advice.





  • 5.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-17-2018 08:59 AM
    Thank you. I hadn’t thought about the bank’s liability.
    The statute of limitations is an interesting issue. Would the judge consider that issue to insulate the ex-wife in the family part case? I am inclined to think she would not which leads me to think she would do the same with the son.
    I am not following your last comment about the statute of limitations and discovery. Can you explain?
    Sent from my iPad




  • 6.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-18-2018 01:49 AM
    The discovery rule tolls, in appropriate cases, the date of a tort to the date that the claimant discovered, or by reasonable diligence should have discovered, that the claimant has a claim. So, the statute of limitations would run from the date of discovery of the claim by the claimant, not the date that the tort was committed.

    Except for the equitable lien count, I don't think any of the claims will be decided in equity. Whether by judge or jury, the claims appear to be legal.

    Rajeh A. Saadeh
    The Law Office of Rajeh A. Saadeh, L.L.C.
    50 Division Street
    Somerville, N.J. 08876
    p: 908.864.7884
    f: 908.301.6202
    [email protected]
    http://www.rajehsaadeh.com


    IMPORTANT CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
    This message (including any/all attachments) is being sent by an attorney and is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This message (including any/all attachments) contains information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential, and/or otherwise legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, and/or disseminate this message and/or any part of it (including any/all attachments). If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete and destroy any/all copies of this message (including any/all attachments).

    DISCLAIMER REGARDING REPRESENTATION
    This message (including any/all attachments) does not establish an attorney-client relationship between you and me.  An attorney-client relationship between you and me can only be established by personal contact and requires (i) my prior written consent to act as your attorney and (ii) your and my execution of a written retainer agreement.

    LEGAL ADVICE/SOLICITATION
    This message (including any/all attachments) is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute solicitation or legal advice.





  • 7.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-16-2018 11:09 AM

    Adjourn the trial until you can get discovery in light of the new found information

    Constructive trust if you cannot amend to add son

    Fraud

    Possibly request guardian for your client

     

    Albertina Webb, Esq.

     

    83 South Street, Suite 302

    Freehold, NJ 07728

    Tel. 732-409-1144

    Fax 732-409-0350

     

    This e-mail communication contains information that is confidential, privileged and subject to legal restrictions and penalties regarding its unauthorized disclosure or other use.  If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are prohibited from copying, distributing or otherwise using this information.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and all attachments from your system.

     






  • 8.  RE: adding a party post-divorce

    Posted 08-16-2018 03:08 PM

    Thanks, Abby