Try Kelly v. Kelly, 217 N.J. Super. 147 (Ch. Div. 1986)
The case is a Chancery Division opinion, I believe by Judge Clyne. It
specifically dealt with the issue in a post-judgment matter and confirms
some of the comments made by Ms. Marchioni.
Armando R. Horta, Esq.
The Horta Law Group, LLC
The Renaissance Center
15 Engle Street, Suite 102
Englewood, New Jersey 07631
Office: 201-375-3975
Fax: 201-371-5510
www.HortaLawGroup.comEmail:
[email protected]THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS EMAIL COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR
THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT NAMED ABOVE.
This message may be an Attorney-Client communication, and as such is
privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this
communication in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution,
or copying of the message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in error, please destroy this transmission and notify us
immediately by telephone and/or reply email.
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 tax-related
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party any matters addressed herein.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Amy Shimalla via New Jersey State Bar
Original Message------
The case nancy references is gargiulo but it dealt with the pendente lite period, not post judgment.
Amy Zylman Shimalla, Esq.
Collaborative Practitioner, Mediator & Certified Matrimonial Attorney
908-753-3833 (p)
908-753-4189 (f)