Hi Jenny.
I read Walker this morning.
Reads like a chapter from a Civil War battle: the war of All against All.
Looks like Judge Justus got it all right.
I do not see how the former husband prevails at plenary hearing. A party-signed agreement stating the mediator may arbitrate satisfies Minkowitz. It is not an informed consent provision as required in Fawzy v. Fawzy.
Arbitration law, including in family law matters, is designed for expedition and is not intended to crrate a procedural quagmire that only delays consideration on the merits. Former husband may have changed his mind, but the trial court should not allow him to change the deal.
What am I missing here?
Hanan
-------------------------------------------
Hanan Isaacs Esq.
Kingston NJ
(609)683-7400
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 2/28/2014 10:53:00 AM
From: [email protected]
Subject: Walker v. Walker - unpub trial - mediation/arbitration
Walker v. Walker - This matter concerns the unique issue of whether the parties consented to Richard H. Weiner, Esq., acting as an arbitrator, after he had mediated certain real estate issues on behalf of plaintiff Ira Walker and defendant Deborah Walker, which mediation resulted in the parties' execution of a Memorandum of Agreement.
-------------------------------------------
Jenny Berse Esq.
Cranford NJ
(855)FAM-LAW1
-------------------------------------------