<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Michael Resnick &#124; Attorney at Law &#124; Articles</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:03:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Ability to Pay and College Contribution</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/ability-to-pay-and-college-contribution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/ability-to-pay-and-college-contribution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:03:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[College Contribution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=380</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Trial court required parent to contribute 28% toward his yougest daughter&#8217;s college education.   The Appellate Division agreed the parent had a financial obligation to contribute where proofs demonstrated the  parent had an active role assisting the child preparing for college such as SATs, applications, selection of schools, etc., but a plenary hearing was warranted to determine [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trial court required parent to contribute 28% toward his yougest daughter&#8217;s college education.   The Appellate Division agreed the parent had a financial obligation to contribute where proofs demonstrated the  parent had an active role assisting the child preparing for college such as SATs, applications, selection of schools, etc., but a plenary hearing was warranted to determine the parent&#8217;s financial ability to contribute.    <em><a title="NEW JERSEY COLLEGE MEDIATOR" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3938-10.opn.html" target="_self">Sciacca v. Hagarty, New Jersey App. Div., January 18, 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/ability-to-pay-and-college-contribution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy and Equitable Distribution</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/bankruptcy-and-equitable-distribution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/bankruptcy-and-equitable-distribution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=378</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By denying ownership in the marital home in his bankruptcy case and thereafter taking the opposite position in the divorce proceeding, the husband was attempting to manipulate the legal system to his advantage. Judicial estoppel was warranted.     Romano, IV v. Romano, New Jersey App. Div., January 12, 2012
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By denying ownership in the marital home in his bankruptcy case and thereafter taking the opposite position in the divorce proceeding, the husband was attempting to manipulate the legal system to his advantage. Judicial estoppel was warranted.     <em><a title="NEW JERSEY DIVORCE COUNSEL" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a2861-10.opn.html" target="_self">Romano, IV v. Romano, New Jersey App. Div., January 12, 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/bankruptcy-and-equitable-distribution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>10 Year Limited Durational Alimony Appropriate for 12 1/2 Marriage</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/10-year-limited-durational-alimony-appropriate-for-12-12-marriage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/10-year-limited-durational-alimony-appropriate-for-12-12-marriage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:15:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alimony]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=376</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division affirmed trial court&#8217;s determination ordering 10 years of limited duration alimony (LDA) in this 12½ year marriage.      Newman v. Newman, New Jersey App. Div., January 12, 2012
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Appellate Division affirmed trial court&#8217;s determination ordering 10 years of limited duration alimony (LDA) in this 12½ year marriage.      <em><a title="NEW JERSEY DIVORCE LAWYER" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a2614-09.opn.html" target="_self">Newman v. Newman, New Jersey App. Div., January 12, 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/10-year-limited-durational-alimony-appropriate-for-12-12-marriage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s In a Name?</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/whats-in-a-name/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/whats-in-a-name/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Custody]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=374</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The parties had joint legal custody.  Trial court permitted parent primary residence (PPR) to change the child&#8217;s surname.  The Appellate Division reversed holding best interests standard applied and not a presumption that PPR has priority in naming a child.       Emma v. Evans,  New Jersey App. Div., January 20, 2012
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The parties had joint legal custody.  Trial court permitted parent primary residence (PPR) to change the child&#8217;s surname.  The Appellate Division reversed holding best interests standard applied and not a presumption that PPR has priority in naming a child.       <em><a href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a2303-10.opn.html" target="_self">Emma v. Evans,  New Jersey App. Div., January 20, 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/02/whats-in-a-name/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Survivor Benefits and Pension</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/survivor-benefits-and-pension/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/survivor-benefits-and-pension/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Deferred Compensation and Pensions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=372</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is the proper way to deal with the survivor benefit portion of a pension benefit?   The PSA provided for a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to divide equally between the parties the coverture share of the husband&#8217;s interest in his New Jersey Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) pension. The PSA further required the QDRO to &#8220;provide [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is the proper way to deal with the survivor benefit portion of a pension benefit?   The PSA provided for a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to divide equally between the parties the coverture share of the husband&#8217;s interest in his New Jersey Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) pension. The PSA further required the QDRO to &#8220;provide that Wife as the alternate payee shall be entitled to all applicable cost of living adjustments and survivor benefits.&#8221;  The PSA contained similar provisions with respect to wife&#8217;s pension.The parties were not able to agree on who should bear the cost of an election of survivor benefits under the other spouse&#8217;s pension plan. The PSA states that &#8220;there is a dispute as to whether or not any cost associated with such election should be borne by the party making the same. That issue is specifically preserved, to be submitted to the Court for final determination.&#8221;  The Appellate Division directed the trial court to make a full record to support its decision the wife incur the cost.  <em><a title="NJ MATRIMONIAL" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3213-10.opn.html" target="_self">Mammone v. Mammone, New Jersey App. Div., January 12, 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/survivor-benefits-and-pension/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Setting Aside a Consent Order Reducing Alimony</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/setting-aside-a-consent-order-reducing-alimony/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/setting-aside-a-consent-order-reducing-alimony/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Agreements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=370</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When sufficient proofs evidencing possible coercion due to mental instability are presented to the trial court a  litigant is entitled to a hearing as to whether an agreement was reached voluntarily or under duress.   Welch v. Welch, January 12, 2012
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When sufficient proofs evidencing possible coercion due to mental instability are presented to the trial court a  litigant is entitled to a hearing as to whether an agreement was reached voluntarily or under duress.   <em><a title="NEW JERSEY MEDIATOR" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3658-10.opn.html" target="_self">Welch v. Welch, January 12, 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/setting-aside-a-consent-order-reducing-alimony/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Special Needs Trust and its Affect on Child Support</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/special-needs-trust-and-its-affect-on-child-support/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/special-needs-trust-and-its-affect-on-child-support/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:38:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Support]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=368</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This appeal addresses the issue of whether creation of a special needs trust can justify the elimination of the obligation to pay child support to the primary residential parent of a special needs child. The Appellate Division concluded that while a party may utilize a special needs trust to take advantage of government programs to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This appeal addresses the issue of whether creation of a special needs trust can justify the elimination of the obligation to pay child support to the primary residential parent of a special needs child. The Appellate Division concluded that while a party may utilize a special needs trust to take advantage of government programs to lessen the burden on the parent to provide support and medical assistance, the facts of this case do not support a concurrent application to eliminate child support.    <em><a title="NJ DIVORCE MEDIATION" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3723-09.opn.html" target="_self">Bond v. Bond, </a>December 22, 2011</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/special-needs-trust-and-its-affect-on-child-support/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Are the Circumstances to Dissolve a Final Restraining Order?</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/what-are-the-circumstances-to-dissolve-a-final-restraining-order/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/what-are-the-circumstances-to-dissolve-a-final-restraining-order/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:56:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domestic Violence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=365</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Appellate Division determined given the conduct of the parties during the course of 24 years after after the issuance of the final restraining order it is appropriate for the trial court to consider on motion whether the restraints should be vacated.     P.S. v. G.S., New Jersey App. Div., December 21, 2011
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Appellate Division determined given the conduct of the parties during the course of 24 years after after the issuance of the final restraining order it is appropriate for the trial court to consider on motion whether the restraints should be vacated.     <em><a title="NEW JERSEY MEDIATOR" href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a1918-10.opn.html" target="_self">P.S. v. G.S., New Jersey App. Div., December 21, 201</a>1</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/what-are-the-circumstances-to-dissolve-a-final-restraining-order/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Expanding Annulment of a Marriage</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/expanding-annulment-of-a-marriage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/expanding-annulment-of-a-marriage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=362</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Under a bill recently introduced couples would be able to obtain an annulment of a New Jersey marriage or civil union if filed within 30 days of the ceremony.   New Jersey Assembly Bill # A-1335, January 2012
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Under a bill recently introduced couples would be able to obtain an annulment of a New Jersey marriage or civil union if filed within 30 days of the ceremony.   <em><a title="NEW JERSEY ANNULMENT" href="http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A1500/1335_I1.HTM" target="_self">New Jersey Assembly Bill # A-1335, January 2012</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/expanding-annulment-of-a-marriage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Death a Deterrent to Getting Divorced?</title>
		<link>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/is-death-a-deterrent-to-getting-divorced/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/is-death-a-deterrent-to-getting-divorced/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:49:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mresnick</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/?p=360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new study entitled &#8220;Divorce and Death&#8221; shows that broken marriages can kill at the same rate as smoking cigarettes.   Indications that the risk of dying is a full 23% higher among divorcées than married people surprised even the researchers, who didn&#8217;t think life expectancy would be slashed to ages comparable with smokers, heavy drinkers, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new study entitled &#8220;<a href="http://pss.sagepub.com/content/20/1/107.abstract">Divorce and Death</a>&#8221; shows that broken marriages can kill at the same rate as smoking cigarettes.   Indications that the risk of dying is a full 23% higher among divorcées than married people surprised even the researchers, who didn&#8217;t think life expectancy would be slashed to ages comparable with smokers, heavy drinkers, and the obese.  </p>
<p>The stats are certainly newsworthy, but you have to read past the headlines. Study authors David Sbarra and Paul Nietert are careful to note that the associations between divorce and death &#8220;cannot be deemed causal.&#8221; It&#8217;s not as if you file your divorce papers and the Grim Reaper gets an email to move you up on his calendar. Rather, the research indicates that &#8220;there is something uniquely difficult about remaining separated or divorced that accelerates time of death.&#8221; </p>
<p>Ex-husbands are at significantly higher risk of early death than their ex-wives. Why? Because wives help keep their husbands alive. Men generally die younger than women, but wives are de facto healthcare proxies. Relationship studies dating back to the 1970s have shown that without a woman around, a man&#8217;s health fails and he does little about it. Awareness campaigns and technology advances have improved the prognosis; men are more likely to attempt self-diagnosis on the web, and alert systems are available to single shut-ins who have fallen down and can&#8217;t get up. But these are afterthoughts, whereas companionship builds in prevention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mlrlawyer.com/article/2012/01/is-death-a-deterrent-to-getting-divorced/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

