NJSBA Family Law Section

 View Only
  • 1.  "Retirement"

    Posted 12-02-2019 11:33 AM

    Does anyone know of a case that says that "retirement" under the new alimony statute (or even old law) meant that a payor was no longer working, not just retired from his primary occupation? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

     

     

    Charles F. Vuotto, Jr., Esq.

    Starr, Gern, Davison & Rubin, P.C.

    Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Matrimonial Law Attorney

    Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers

    Certified by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers as an Arbitrator

    Qualified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as an Economic Mediator

    2016 Tischler Award Winner given by the NJSBA

    for Lifetime Achievement in Family Law

    105 Eisenhower Parkway, Suite 401

    Roseland, NJ  07068

    Tel. 973-403-9200, Ext. 246

    Fax 973-364-1403

    E-Fax 973-303-4055

    Email: [email protected] 

    Website: www.starrgern.com

    Website: www.vuotto.com

     



  • 2.  RE: "Retirement"

    Posted 12-02-2019 11:39 AM
    Deegan v. Deegan, 24 N.J. Super. 350 (App. Div. 1992) is the one I used in my last motion. 





  • 3.  RE: "Retirement"

    Posted 12-02-2019 11:40 AM

    Thanks!

     

    Charles F. Vuotto, Jr., Esq.

    Starr, Gern, Davison & Rubin, P.C.

    Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Matrimonial Law Attorney

    Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers

    Certified by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers as an Arbitrator

    Qualified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as an Economic Mediator

    2016 Tischler Award Winner given by the NJSBA

    for Lifetime Achievement in Family Law

    105 Eisenhower Parkway, Suite 401

    Roseland, NJ  07068

    Tel. 973-403-9200, Ext. 246

    Fax 973-364-1403

    E-Fax 973-303-4055

    Email: [email protected] 

    Website: www.starrgern.com

    Website: www.vuotto.com