Quotations from NJ Family Case Law
Child Support
"The judge emphasized the well-recognized principles
stated in those cases that (1) "'where the parties have the
financial wherewithal to provide for their children, the
children are entitled to the benefit of financial advantages
available to them . . . as reflecting a parent's 'good fortune'
and . . . are entitled to have their needs accord with the
current standard of living of both parents, which may reflect an
increase in parental good fortune[,]'" Id. at 221 (quoting
Isaacson, supra, 348 N.J. Super. at 579-80)
(In Cossu vs Cossu, 2006, NP A-0429-05T1)
"'the law is not offended if there is some incidental benefit
to the custodial parent from increased child support.'" Id. at 224
(quoting Isaacson, supra, 348 N.J. Super. at 584).
(In Cossu vs Cossu, 2006, NP A-0429-05T1)
"Current earnings are not the sole criterion to establish a party's obligation for support."
(Halliwell v. Halliwell, 326 N.J.Super. 442, 448
"The potential earning capacity of an individual, not his or her actual income, should be considered when determining the amount a supporting party must pay."
"Our courts do not permit parents to evade their duty to support their children by quitting their jobs or by taking lower paying jobs, regardless of any good or bad faith in doing so."
A court may impute income to payors who voluntarily reduce their earnings"
Only if the court finds that the advantage { of having the non-custodial parent working closer to home and being given more parenting time with his child(ren)] substantially outweighs the disadvantage [possibility of of less support and increased contact between children and non-custodial parent] ....... should the payor's conduct [obtaining a job with less income and capability to have more contact with his children] be viewed as having produced a legitimate change of circumstance entitling him to modification of the support obligation."
[ content and emphasis added by editor to promote discussion ]
To submit a quote, click here. (Include quotation and NJ Case Law reference).
06/24/2006