Alimony | Pennsylvania Family Law Blog - The Law Offices of Sheryl R. Rentz - Part 2
New Law Will Prevent Criminals from Receiving Alimony
A law, which passed recently, revises New Jersey alimony and inheritance laws to make sure people found guilty of abuse, murder and other crimes are not able to receive alimony and inheritance benefit payment. According to this news report, the bill is broken into two sections. With regard to alimony payments, the bill prevents anyone convicted of an attempted murder from receiving alimony from their intended victim. Such victims will also not be responsible for covering the cost of divorce court fees. Prior to this bill’s passage, the divorcing spouse must cover the expense of the other person’s attorney’s fees.
This New Jersey law also eliminates a parent’s right to inherit from their deceased child’s estate if they were found guilty of abandonment or of refusal to acknowledge, sexual assault, endangering the welfare of that child or attempted murder. This law needed to be passed in the interest of fairness and justice. To think that a person can physically harm or try to kill a spouse and then expect to receive alimony payments or an inheritance from that person goes beyond unfair. It is unconscionable. Read the rest »
New Jersey Devils’ Martin Brodeur Ordered to Pay Alimony
A New Jersey appeals court has ruled that New Jersey Devils goalie Martin Brodeur must pay his ex-wife $500,000 in alimony until the year 2020. According to an Associated Press news report, Brodeur had appealed, asking that he only be required to pay the alimony until his projected retirement date in 2021. His ex-wife, Melanie DuBois, had asked for alimony payments until 2024, when their youngest child is anticipated to graduate from college. The appellate court ruled that Brodeur should pay alimony until 2020, when the youngest child will graduate high school. Read the rest »
No Alimony Payments For McGreevey
New York Times reporter Mitchell L. Blumethal reported on August 8, 2008 that a judge ruled that former New Jersey Governor James E. McGreevey will not have to make alimony payments to his former wife. McGreevy resigned from office after admitting he had an affair with a male aide. Wife, Dina Matos was married to McGreevey for eight years.
State Superior Court Judge Karen Cassidy granted the couple a divorce after McGreevey announced on national television that he was “a gay American.” Read the rest »
Former New Jersey Governor Won’t Owe His Ex-Wife Alimony
Former New Jersey Governor James E. McGreevey will not owe his ex-wife, Dina Matos-McGreevey, any alimony, a judge has ruled, according to an Associated Press news report. The couple’s divorce is through after an eight-year marriage, which collapsed when McGreevey announced that he was gay. McGreevey resigned in 2004 after he admitted to having an affair with a male staffer, although the staffer alleged that he was sexually harassed by the governor. The couple separated the following year.
A superior court judge ruled McGreevey must pay $250 a week or $1,075 a month in child support for their 6-year-old daughter. The couple has shared custody of the child. Matos has asked for $2,500 a month in alimony for four years and $1,750 a month in child support. McGreevey, who is now a student, testified during the divorce trial that he is now too poor to pay alimony. Read the rest »
Hulk Hogan Ordered to Pay Estranged Wife $40,000 in Alimony
A Florida Judge has ruled that celebrity wrestler Hulk Hogan must pay his estranged wife, Linda Bollea, $40,000 a month in alimony while their divorce is pending. According to an Associated Press news report, the judge also allowed Hogan, whose real name is Terry Bollea, to take $500,000 out of the couple’s assets for himself and use up to $400,000 for legal fees in their son’s criminal case. Nick Bollea is serving an eight-month jail sentence for causing an auto accident that left a passenger severely injured. Read the rest »
Defining Relationships That Can Result In Palimony Payments
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently ruled on the question of palimony and when it is deemed ‘appropriate’ in the eyes of the law. The court ruled that two people don’t have to live together for one to receive palimony when the relationship ends. Specifically, the court determined that living together is not essential, rather, “it is the promise to support, expressed or implied, coupled with a marital-type relationship, that are the indispensable elements to support a valid claim for palimony. Read the rest »
We know your problems are unique & special.
Call us, we will listen.
(610) 645-0100
Meet Attorney