NJ & CT News

NEW JERSEY

Gov. Christie Signs Alimony Reform and Collaborative Divorce Bills into Law

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Sept. 10 signed a host of bills into law, including an alimony reform package and a measure that allows couples to dissolve their marriages through a mediation-like process.

A845/971/1649 makes drastic changes to the way alimony is awarded in divorce cases, and is designed to give judges, lawyers and litigants a set of guidelines to follow when determining how much alimony should be awarded and for how long. The changes are prospective and would not apply to divorce settlements or orders already in effect.

In any case in which a party asks for alimony, a judge will be required to issue a written ruling explaining his or her analysis of relevant factors in determining whether there should or should not be an award of alimony. If the marriage or civil union lasts less than 20 years, alimony will not exceed the length of the relationship, but for exceptional circumstances. In addition to the factors already in the statute, judges will have to consider the ages of the parties when they were married and when the relationship ended, the need for separate homes, the ability of both parties to maintain a standard of living, the dependency of one party on the other, whether one party has particular health problems and other relevant issues.

Judges will be allowed to suspend or terminate limited-duration alimony if the recipient establishes a cohabitation relationship. A judge can order alimony to be resumed if the cohabitation ends, but may not extend it beyond the original termination date. In cases of cohabitation, judges must analyze, among other factors, the cohabitants' joint finances, recognition of the relationship in the couple's social and family circle, duration of the relationship and sharing of household chores. A judge will not be able to reject a claim of cohabitation solely on the grounds that the couple does not live together on a full-time basis.

Alimony payments may now be modified or terminated when they payer reaches full retirement age. There are no changes to the rules governing reimbursement alimony.

The new rules give judges greater authority to modify alimony awards if the payer becomes unemployed involuntarily or sees a dramatic change in his or her financial circumstances. A payer who loses his or her job will be allowed to apply for a modification in payments after being unemployed for a minimum of 90 days. “This represents a great compromise of some very divergent opinions,” Amy Goldstein, a family law litigator at Capehart & Scatchard in Mount Laurel, N.J., who helped write the bill, said.

A second bill, A1477, will allow couples to have a marriage dissolved without court intervention through a process similar to mediation, in which both sides would be required to provide “timely, full and candid disclosure” of relevant information, such as finances, without either side having to resort to discovery. New Jersey joins eight other states ' Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, Utah, Washington and the District of Columbia ' in allowing such a process.

The Family Collaborative Law Act is modeled on a proposal by the New Jersey Law Revision Commission and the national Uniform Law Commission. During the collaborative process, communication between parties and their lawyers will remain confidential, as will communication between parties and certain other professionals, such as therapists and psychiatrists. If the process proves to be unsuccessful, the collaborative lawyers will have to withdraw from the case and both parties would retain new counsel, which cannot be lawyers from the collaborative lawyers' firms.

The collaborative process must end if one party gives notice for any reason; either party files a document initiating a court proceeding without first obtaining the permission of the other party; either party is subject to or obtains a temporary or final restraining order under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act; either party files a motion for emergent relief; a party fails to provide information necessary to resolve the dispute; or if the collaborative lawyer withdraws from the proceedings. ' Michael Booth , New Jersey Law Journal

CONNECTICUT

Former White House Lawyer Gets 15 Years for Attacking Wife

Former White House lawyer J. Michael Farren has been sentenced to a 15-year prison term for beating his wife and strangling her in January 2010. The attack left attorney Mary Margaret Farren so badly injured that she has been unable to return to the practice of law. Prior to the incident, Ms. Farren was employed by prominent law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

Ms. Farren read a statement to the sentencing court describing her husband's emotional and physical abuse during the course of the marriage, which she said had caused her and their two daughters to fear for their safety. Those fears continued even after Farren was charged with attempted murder, because he remained free pending trial, and then sentencing. Justice Richard Comerford took note of Farren's apparent lack of conscience, noting, “I never heard him say I'm sorry” ' not to his ex-wife or to his children. “That is bizarre and rather tragic and speaks volumes to me about what type of individual we're dealing with,” said Justice Comerford, who denied Farren's request to remain free pending his appeal.

'

NEW JERSEY

Gov. Christie Signs Alimony Reform and Collaborative Divorce Bills into Law

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Sept. 10 signed a host of bills into law, including an alimony reform package and a measure that allows couples to dissolve their marriages through a mediation-like process.

A845/971/1649 makes drastic changes to the way alimony is awarded in divorce cases, and is designed to give judges, lawyers and litigants a set of guidelines to follow when determining how much alimony should be awarded and for how long. The changes are prospective and would not apply to divorce settlements or orders already in effect.

In any case in which a party asks for alimony, a judge will be required to issue a written ruling explaining his or her analysis of relevant factors in determining whether there should or should not be an award of alimony. If the marriage or civil union lasts less than 20 years, alimony will not exceed the length of the relationship, but for exceptional circumstances. In addition to the factors already in the statute, judges will have to consider the ages of the parties when they were married and when the relationship ended, the need for separate homes, the ability of both parties to maintain a standard of living, the dependency of one party on the other, whether one party has particular health problems and other relevant issues.

Judges will be allowed to suspend or terminate limited-duration alimony if the recipient establishes a cohabitation relationship. A judge can order alimony to be resumed if the cohabitation ends, but may not extend it beyond the original termination date. In cases of cohabitation, judges must analyze, among other factors, the cohabitants' joint finances, recognition of the relationship in the couple's social and family circle, duration of the relationship and sharing of household chores. A judge will not be able to reject a claim of cohabitation solely on the grounds that the couple does not live together on a full-time basis.

Alimony payments may now be modified or terminated when they payer reaches full retirement age. There are no changes to the rules governing reimbursement alimony.

The new rules give judges greater authority to modify alimony awards if the payer becomes unemployed involuntarily or sees a dramatic change in his or her financial circumstances. A payer who loses his or her job will be allowed to apply for a modification in payments after being unemployed for a minimum of 90 days. “This represents a great compromise of some very divergent opinions,” Amy Goldstein, a family law litigator at Capehart & Scatchard in Mount Laurel, N.J., who helped write the bill, said.

A second bill, A1477, will allow couples to have a marriage dissolved without court intervention through a process similar to mediation, in which both sides would be required to provide “timely, full and candid disclosure” of relevant information, such as finances, without either side having to resort to discovery. New Jersey joins eight other states ' Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, Utah, Washington and the District of Columbia ' in allowing such a process.

The Family Collaborative Law Act is modeled on a proposal by the New Jersey Law Revision Commission and the national Uniform Law Commission. During the collaborative process, communication between parties and their lawyers will remain confidential, as will communication between parties and certain other professionals, such as therapists and psychiatrists. If the process proves to be unsuccessful, the collaborative lawyers will have to withdraw from the case and both parties would retain new counsel, which cannot be lawyers from the collaborative lawyers' firms.

The collaborative process must end if one party gives notice for any reason; either party files a document initiating a court proceeding without first obtaining the permission of the other party; either party is subject to or obtains a temporary or final restraining order under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act; either party files a motion for emergent relief; a party fails to provide information necessary to resolve the dispute; or if the collaborative lawyer withdraws from the proceedings. ' Michael Booth , New Jersey Law Journal

CONNECTICUT

Former White House Lawyer Gets 15 Years for Attacking Wife

Former White House lawyer J. Michael Farren has been sentenced to a 15-year prison term for beating his wife and strangling her in January 2010. The attack left attorney Mary Margaret Farren so badly injured that she has been unable to return to the practice of law. Prior to the incident, Ms. Farren was employed by prominent law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

Ms. Farren read a statement to the sentencing court describing her husband's emotional and physical abuse during the course of the marriage, which she said had caused her and their two daughters to fear for their safety. Those fears continued even after Farren was charged with attempted murder, because he remained free pending trial, and then sentencing. Justice Richard Comerford took note of Farren's apparent lack of conscience, noting, “I never heard him say I'm sorry” ' not to his ex-wife or to his children. “That is bizarre and rather tragic and speaks volumes to me about what type of individual we're dealing with,” said Justice Comerford, who denied Farren's request to remain free pending his appeal.

'