I agree, and that's the problem the Supreme Court struggled with in Painter.  They don't want to waste parties' and the judiciary's time and resources fighting over relationship-ending questions.  They opted for a bright line rule:  signed final settlement agreement or a filed divorce complaint culminating in a final divorce judgment.  What is interesting about Judge Lihotz's opinion for the panel in Genovese  is that the court is willing to create a narrow band of cases where something so strongly indicates a break in the relationship that it is reasonable to cut off equitable distribution at that point.  One of the cases she cited, as I recall, involved a wife who brought an action for separate maintenance and later argued for an E.D. cutoff date substantially after that first action was brought.  I believe the court used the date of the separate maintenance action as the cutoff date.  In Genovese, a New York final judgment coupled with the Husband's immediate remarriage signaled the end of the relationship and set the E.D. terminus date, even though the New York divorce judgment was later overturned on appeal.

A lengthy separation alone does not appear to qualify, although it certainly is relevant on the issue of allocation of assets/debts.  That's what the cases seem to say.

Hanan

Hanan M. Isaacs, Esq.
	Hanan M. Isaacs, P.C. 4499 Route 27, Kingston, NJ t 609.683.7400 f 609.921.8982 vCard: Download here >> [email protected] www.hananisaacs.com
Compassionate counsel; tough advocacy.