NJSBA Family Law Section

 View Only

  • 1.  Good reason to have 19 yr old DV dismissed

    Posted 05-15-2013 08:34 PM
    Client is 68, retired, and not in great health.  He wants a DV FROM from 1994 dismissed.  (A complaint that alleged "Defendant verbally abused the plaintiff by the use of profane language".... pre Corrente v. Corrente to say the least).

    I'm confident on all the Carfagno factors.  Just one concern -- how much of a threshold I need to show for a basic reason to have it dismissed.  With younger people, I've cited a background check that cost them a job, or a desire to go hunting (etc).  Client's reason is essentially "I'm old and don't want it hanging over my head."  I'm not sure that would fly if the motion is opposed.

    Anyone had this issue come up, where the toughest part of a Carfagno motion is coming up with a basic reason to file it?  Any "standard" reasons one might cite?

    Thanks

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


  • 2.  RE:Good reason to have 19 yr old DV dismissed

    Posted 10-16-2013 05:13 PM

    I received a bunch of responses to this (all off-list), so I figured I'd post an update.

    Had the Carfagno hearing today and the FRO was dismissed over the plaintiff's vehement objection.  My post inquired into the reasons one might use to use an old FRO vacated.  Since the filing of the original motion, my client had a new reason, which the judge specifically cited - might be of use to anyone else in this situation.

    Apparently, when entering the country after a vacation (including from Mexico or Canada), everyone is now run through a database.  If a FRO is in effect, the person is lead into a little white room with bright lights and made to wait 60-90 minutes while various checks (NCIC, etc) are run and while Homeland Security verifies that the person is not traveling with the plaintiff in the FRO.  Massively inconvenient and embarrassing.

    So, if anyone finds themself in the situation I was in, I would advise a quick vacation so the person can truthfully certify as to the experience they underwent as a result of being the subject of a FRO.

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




    Original Message