Litigation

1. Pretrial Procedures: N.J. Court Rule Rule 5:5.



2. Generally, a trial of the marital dissolution or custody dispute may NOT be bifurcated from the trial of disputes over support and equitable distribution. N.J. Court Rule 5:7-8.



3. Tape Recordings



4. Can an attorney be held liable for a client’s fraudulent asset transfers?
   
   ICLE states in its advertisement for a seminar that: The recent decision of Banco Popular North America v. Gandi, _ N.J. _ [Docket No. A-5/6-03; Decided June 27, 2005] is a major expansion of the law that affects ALL professionals. Anyone who advises clients on asset transfers, be they attorneys, bankers, financial advisors or the like – BEWARE! The Banco Popular June 27, 2005 decision holds that although there is no cause of action for “creditor fraud” in New Jersey, one who allegedly assists a client in transferring assets to defraud a creditor may be held liable under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act ("UFTA"; N.J.S.A. 25:2-20 et seq.).



5. Law Lessons from: IACOUZZI v. IACOUZZI (App. Div., A-3179-04T1, March 6, 2006, not approved for publication): The doctrine of laches will estop a party from making a claim after an unreasonable and unexplained delay in seeking relief when the delay results in prejudice to the party against whom the claim is made. Lavin v. Board of Education, 90 N.J. 145, 151-53 (1982). The application of the doctrine "more often than not, will turn on whether a party has been misled to his harm by the delay." Id. at 153. In the absence of prejudice, there can be no laches or estoppel. See Clarke v. Clarke, 359 N.J. Super. 562, 570-71 (App. Div. 2003).



6. Law Lessons from: BHARADWAJ v. LENDZIOSZEK (App. Div., A-3423-04T3, March 3, 2006, not approved for publication): N.J.S.A. 2B:50-1 provides that "a person seeking recovery of goods wrongly held by another may bring an action for replevin in the Superior Court. If the person establishes the cause of action, the court shall enter an order granting possession." See R. 4:61. An action for replevin is properly brought in the Law Division except where goods whose return is sought have peculiar artificial value in which case an action for equitable replevin will lie in the Chancery Division. See Burr v. Bloomsberg, 101 N.J. Eq. 615 (Chan.1927).



7. Law Lessons from CITKOWICZ v. CITKOWICZ (App. Div., A-4449-04T3, March 17, 2006, not approved for publication): The doctrine of laches is "invoked to deny a party enforcement of a known right when the party engages in an inexcusable and unexplained delay in exercising that right to the prejudice of the other party." Knorr v. Smeal, 178 N.J. 169, 180-81 (2003). It is often described as allowing the courtroom doors to close on a claimant who has delayed "for a length of time which, unexplained and unexcused, is unreasonable under the circumstances and has been prejudicial to the other party." Northwest Covenant Med. Ctr. v. Fishman, 167 N.J. 123, 140 (2001) (citing West Jersey Title & Guar. Co. v. Indus. Trust Co., 27 N.J. 144, 153 (1958)). "The core equitable concern in applying laches is whether a party has been harmed by the delay." Knorr, 178 N.J. 181 (citing Laving v. Hackensack Bd. of Educ., 90 N.J. 145, 152-53 (1982)).



8. Law Lessons from COSTANZA v. CLEMENTE (App. Div., A-545-04T5, approved for publication March 27, 2006):
   
   Trial judges are prohibited from entering judgments before all issues have been resolved, except "with the approval of the Family Presiding Judge, which approval shall be granted only in extraordinary circumstances and for good cause shown." R. 5:7-8.
   
   It is contrary to R. 4:42-1(a)(4) and Entress v. Entress, 376 N.J. Super. 125, 134 (App. Div. 2005) for the judgment of divorce to be entered without requiring the parties to append a written copy of the Property Settlement Agreement.
   
   The trial judge must provide an adequate statement of findings and conclusions after trial. R. 1:7-4(a).



9. Available Resources



10. General Topic Index

NOTE: If you believe that ANYTHING on this Webpage is misspelled, incomplete, inaccurate or downright wrong; or if a Link fails to link to its intended Webpage, please send me an Email, expressing your concern or opinion.

Also, please be mindful that THE INFORMATION AND SOURCES PROVIDED HEREIN MAY NOT BE ACCURATE OR COMPLETE -- YOU SHOULD CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RELYING ON THIS INFORMATION.  No warranties, express or implied, are made regarding the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information.

Also, please be aware that the information on this Webpage DOES NOT constitute LEGAL ADVICE, which advice will only be given in PRIVATE CONSULTATION, after entering into an ATTORNEY / CLIENT RELATIONSHIP, and the execution of a WRITTEN RETAINER AGREEMENT. Also, simply sending to me an email or providing information to me does NOT create an ATTORNEY / CLIENT RELATIONSHIP   -- if you wish to retain me as your attorney or mediator, you are welcome to call me at (908)486-2200, or to Email me, to schedule an appointment.

Links

Linked sites are NOT under the control of the Paul G. Kostro, A Professional Corporation or Paul G. Kostro, Esq. (the "Authors") and the Authors are NOT responsible for the content of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site.

The Authors do NOT endorse websites, companies or entities to which links are provided.

The Authors reserve the right to terminate any link at any time.

If you decide to access any of the third party sites linked to, you do so entirely AT YOUR OWN RISK.

© Paul G. Kostro, Esq. 2005