NJSBA Family Law Section

 View Only
  • 1.  Basic (?) question -- "Hold X in contempt" vs. "Finding X to be in violation of litigant's rights"

    Posted 02-24-2016 04:29 PM
    I've frequently seen judges deny an application to hold a party in contempt, but find that said party was in violation of litigant's rights.

    I assume it's essentially a distinction without a difference as the ultimate remedy (enforcement and sanctions) are the same, but what's the difference and why do judges do this? Is it because only the court can institute a contempt proceeding (Rule 1:10-2) whereas an enforcement application is "to enforce litigant's rights" (R. 1:10-3)?

    Thanks,



    <x-sigsep>

    David Perry Davis, Esq.
    ----------------------------------------------------
       www.FamilyLawNJ.pro
    ----------------------------------------------------
    112 West Franklin Avenue
    Pennington, NJ 08534
    Voice: 609-737-2222
    Fax:    609-737-3222

    </x-sigsep>


  • 2.  RE: Basic (?) question -- "Hold X in contempt" vs. "Finding X to be in violation of litigant's rights"

    Posted 02-24-2016 04:45 PM

    DPD,

    At the last Burlington County Bench/Bar this issue came up.  One of the Family Part judges explained why he does not grant motions to hold someone in contempt but will enter an enforcement of litigant's rights order. 

    It is as you thought. The procedures for a contempt application written into R. 1:10-2 and the procedures for ELR under 1:10-3 are different.  A normal motion does not meet the requirements of 1:10-2 even if the remedy under both rules could be the same.

    Andrew

     

    Andrew L. Rochester, Esquire

    Morgenstern & Rochester

    A Partnership of LLCs

    1874 Route 70 East

    Suite 4

    Cherry Hill, NJ 08003

    Telephone: (856)489-6200

    Fax: (856)424-6977

    Email: [email protected]

    Website: www.MandRLaw.net

    This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This communication may contain material protected by privilege, including but not limited to the attorney client privilege, work product doctrine or the joint defense privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify Morgenstern & Rochester, by telephone at (856) 489-6200. You will be reimbursed for reasonable costs incurred in notifying us

     

    Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with recently-enacted U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are now required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including any attachments, is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, by anyone for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties that may be imposed by the federal government or for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.

     






  • 3.  RE: Basic (?) question -- "Hold X in contempt" vs. "Finding X to be in violation of litigant's rights"

    Posted 02-24-2016 05:07 PM

    If you want the actual contempt sanctions, including arrest, you have to serve that party personally, I believe.

     

    Read 1:10-3 and 1:10-5.

     

    Robert E. Goldstein, Esq.
    Drescher & Cheslow, P.A.

    610 Bridge Plaza Drive

    Manalapan, NJ 07726

    (732) 972-1600
    Fax (732) 972-0038
    E-mail: [email protected]
    Member, Middlesex County Bar Association, New Jersey Association for Justice and New Jersey State Bar Association

         

     

    IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalty or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

    Privileged Information: This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or any attachment, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please delete this message, along with any attachments, from your computer. Thank you
    .

     






  • 4.  RE: Basic (?) question -- "Hold X in contempt" vs. "Finding X to be in violation of litigant's rights"

    Posted 02-24-2016 05:33 PM

    I could very well be wrong, since I am just responding on the fly without giving it much thought (sorry), but I do believe that contempt sanctions $1,000 or better rate a right to a jury trial.

    ------------------------------
    Curtis Romanowski Esq.
    Senior Attorney - Proprietor
    Metuchen NJ
    (732)603-8585