Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

31 C.S v. J.B. -- rank: 709

... refusal to engage in scheduled evaluations. With respect to the N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 factors, the court weighed Cindy's ability to agree, communicate ... stated that it did 7 The fourteen factors listed in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 are: (1) the parents' ability to agree, communicate and cooperate ... Junior]. Again, [the court] reviewed the factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4, and [it] did not find that there’s sufficient evidence ... discretion in denying her custody application and when applying the N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 factors, particularly in light of the fact that Jane has ... examine, at a minimum, the fourteen factors set out in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4. D.A. v. R.C., 438 N.J. Super. 431 ... Family Part judge to apply the statutory factors outlined in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 . . . and reach a conclusion that is supported by the ...

docket:	a3055-20
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2022-10-21
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	34980

32 SAMUEL K. BURLUM v. NERMIN UCAR -- rank: 709

... AT ISSUE, 'THE RIGHTS OF BOTH PARENTS SHALL BE EQUAL[,]' N.J.S.A. 9:2-4.2[.] POINT II THE TRIAL JUDGE ERRED WHEN HE DECLARED ... HIS CONDUCT HAS A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE CHILD[,] N.J.S.A. 9:2-4.4(C)[.] POINT III THE TRIAL JUDGE FAILED TO ADEQUATELY ... the judge did not make an erroneous custody determination. Applying N.J.S.A. 9:2-4, the judge concluded that it would be in the best ... minor child, the rights of both parents shall be equal[.]' N.J.S.A. 9:2-4. However, the record supports the various rulings during the pendency ... s] conduct has a substantial adverse effect on the child.' N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c). But the record A-2471-17T4 8 supports the ...

docket:	a2471-17
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-05-04
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	41099

33 J.J.R. v. K.A.R -- rank: 709

... parents' conduct has a substantial adverse effect on the child. [N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c).] A party seeking a change in custody bears the ... in residential designation' and not a change in custody. Applying N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 and the controlling case law, the judge concluded it would ...

docket:	a1268-20
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2021-11-19
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	36353

34 NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY v. R.W. and M.M and L.S. and J.S -- rank: 709

... that does not end our inquiry. As Mark points out, N.J.S.A. 9:2-4.1(a) provides, in part: Notwithstanding any provision of law ... a stay in accordance with the Rules of Court. Although N.J.S.A. 9:2-4.1(a) allows a Family Part judge to award custody ... the record demonstrates he never applied for a hearing under N.J.S.A. 9:2-4.1(a). Further, he did not provide an evaluation to ... the judge should relieve him from his parole restrictions under N.J.S.A. 9:2-4.1(a), and because the judge credited Dr. Jeffrey's ...

docket:	a3037-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2022-03-03
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	114419

35 IRENE TORUNOGLU v. ALPER TORUNOGLU -- rank: 705

... A CIRCUMSTANCE CREATED BY . . . PLAINTIFF IN VIOLATION OF BOTH THE N[.]J[.]S[.]A[.] 9:2-4 AND THE PARTIES' [FINAL JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE]. DUE PROCESS ERROR ... TO HOLD . . . PLAINTIFF IN CONTEMPT FOR HER VIOLATIONS OF THE N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 AND THE PARTIES['] [FINAL JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE]. A-0526-19T4 ...

docket:	a0526-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-10-14
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	41713

36 ANDREW FLOCKHART v. KAREN FLOCKHART -- rank: 705

... decision, the court reviewed each of the statutory factors under N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c) relating to custody and made specific findings about the ... determine to be in the best interests of the child.' N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(a) to (c). The 'paramount consideration' in determining custody 'is ... 20 extensive evaluation of the applicable factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4, emphasizing the discord between the parties and defendant's attempts ... accorded 'due weight,'' Beck, 86 N.J. at 501 (quoting N.J.S.A. 9:2-4), we discern no abuse in the court's discretion in ...

docket:	a1578-16
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2019-05-24
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	81369

37 IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF A MINOR CHILD -- rank: 702

... custody statute and the concept of joint legal custody in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4); V.C. v. M.J.B., 163 N.J. 200 ...

docket:	FA-000010-20
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2021-11-17
status:
citation:
Document Size:	126627

38 A.U.B. VS. E.L. -- rank: 700

... custody, the judge reviewed the fourteen statutory factors identified in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c), namely: the parents' ability to agree, communicate and cooperate ... v. Beck, 86 N.J. at 485. To that end, N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 provides that: A-0063-22 33 [I]t is in ... determine to be in the best interests of the child.' N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(a) to (c). The court must also 'identify on the ... of her charge to review the fourteen statutory factors under N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c) when assessing custody. In rejecting joint custody, the judge ... noting defendant's 'entrenched' negative view of plaintiff. Referring to N.J.S.A. 9:2- 4(c), the judge concluded that plaintiff was better suited as ... seriousness of the history of domestic violence against the other N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 factors.' Ibid. Here, the judge did not explicitly determine ...

docket:	a0063-22
court:	appellate
decided:	2024-05-03
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	76722

39 VICTORIA TOLSTUNOV v. ROSTISLAV VILSHTEYN -- rank: 700

... if it is contrary to the child's best interests. N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(d) ('The court shall order any custody arrangement which is ... the noncustodial parent to develop and maintain their familial relationship'); N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 (finding 'it is in the public policy of this State ...

docket:	a1495-16
court:	New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2018-07-30
status:
citation:
Document Size:	42729

40 J.C v. J.B -- rank: 695

... best interests of the parties' son, Jude, in accordance with N.J.S.A. 9:2-4. After a brief two-year marriage, the parties were divorced ... apply those facts to the best interests test required by N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c) in determining parenting time disputes. Plaintiff also contends the ... analysis that gives weight to the factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2- -4(c).' Hand, 391 N.J. Super. at 105. The statute ... employment responsibilities; and the age and number of the children. [N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c).] When 'the parents cannot agree to a custody arrangement ... custody plan which the court shall consider in awarding custody.' N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(e). Lastly, when making 'any custody arrangement not agreed to ... place on the record the factors which justify' its order. N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(f). '[T]he decision concerning the type of custody ...

docket:	a0548-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-03-30
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	26442

41 SURAIYA BEGUM v. SENTHILKUMAR PALANISAMY HEWITT -- rank: 695

... the parties' agreement or imposed by the court[.]' Ibid. See N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 (delineating best interest factors in custody determinations); see also Lepis ...

docket:	a0562-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-11-16
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	42368

42 K.F v. N.V -- rank: 693

... this conclusion, the judge considered the statutory factors identified in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c), namely: the parents' ability to agree, communicate and cooperate ... Ibid.] Referring to the July 25, 2017 consent order and N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c), the judge observed: it was quite clear from all ... her relocation; (4) reflects a misapplication and flawed analysis of N.J.S.A. 9:2-4, and fails 'to extend the holdings in A.J. v ... parent to satisfy the 'best interests analysis . . . set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c), supplemented by other factors as appropriate.' 230 N.J. at 338 (citing N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c)). The Bisbing Court specifically overruled the two-part removal ... and replaced it with the best-interest standard embodied in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4. 230 N.J. at 312-13. Further, the Bisbing ...

docket:	a1742-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2021-03-01
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	59246

43 STEFANOS PANTAGIS v. ATHENA LANTZ -- rank: 693

... parental alienation' and overlooking the best interest factors contained in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 to 'determin[e] the disputed parenting time issue[s].' See ...

docket:	a0029-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2021-01-29
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	46647

44 V.P. v. P.A.P. -- rank: 688

... judge reviewed the public policy and statutory standards codified in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4, and addressed the parties as follows: [T]he [L]egislature ... an intelligent decision[.]' 438 N.J. Super. at 458 (quoting N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c)) 28 A-3793-17T2 (emphasis omitted). The judge did ... court t o interview the children. The judge also violated N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c) by not considering the children's views at a ... The judge erred by failing to consider, as required by N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c), the children's views at the time when both ...

docket:	a3793-17
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2019-12-13
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	55226

45 A.J v. R.J. -- rank: 688

... 5:3-7(a)(6), it must make findings under N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 that the sanction imposed is in the best interests of ... Bisbing, 230 N.J. 309 (2017), the court must apply N.J.S.A. 9:2-4. Because the trial judge applied the wrong law related to the intra-state relocation and did not apply N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 when he sanctioned plaintiff, we reverse and remand for further ... analysis that gives weight to the factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2-4(c). [Hand v. Hand, 391 N.J. Super. 102, 105 ... considers the children's best interests and findings pursuant to N.J.S.A. 9:2-4, before the sanction is ordered. Additionally, because the relief granted ... record. Therefore, a best-interest hearing and findings pursuant to N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 is required where a court transfers custody as a ...

docket:	a1168-18
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2019-10-07
status:	Published
citation:
Document Size:	27801