Skip to main content

NEW JERSEY EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION

New Jersey is an Equitable Distribution State. This means that marital assets will be divided in a manner that is considered fair but not necessarily equal for the parties. Below we have developed an outline to give a general overview on Equitable Distribution in New Jersey.
Equitable Distribution in New Jersey an Outline Overview.
I.        Assets subject to Equitable Distribution
a.        Assets that are Acquired During the Marriage
b.      Assets acquired in contemplation of marriage
II.      Assets Immune by Statute
a.       Premarital – except the increase in active assets value due to efforts of non-owner.
b.      Inheritances
c.        Gifts from third parties
III.    Specific Assets: Subject to Equitable Distribution
a.       Pensions and other retirement accounts that were acquired during the marriage.
b.      Real Estate as per I(a), (b).
c.       Automobiles, jewelry, inter-spousal gifts, house contents
d.      Stocks, bonds, etc.
e.       Insurance annuities and cash surrender value of life insurance policy
f.        Business and partnership interests
g.       Personal injury awards (medical expenses and lost wages only)
h.      Debts, obligations, tax liabilities
IV.    Assets not subject to Equitable Distribution
a.       Educational and professional degrees
b.      Licenses.
c.       Assets immune by statute
V.      N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23.1: Determination of Equitable Distribution
a.       Marriage length.
b.      Age, physical and emotional health of the parties.
c.        Income or property brought to the marriage by each party.
d.      Standard of living during the marriage.
e.      Existence of written agreements made by the parties
f.        Income and earning capacity of each party
g.       The contribution by each party to the education, training or earning power of the other.
h.      The contribution of each party to the acquisition, dissipation, preservation, depreciation or appreciation in the amount or value of the marital property
i.         Contribution of the party as homemaker.
j.        Tax consequences of the proposed distribution to each party.
k.       The present value of the property.
l.         The need of a parent who has physical custody of a child to own or occupy the marital home.
m.    The debts and liabilities of the parties.
n.      The need for creation now, or in the future, of a trust fund to secure reasonably foreseeable medical or educational costs for a spouse or child.
o.      Other factors which the court may deem relevant.

For more information about equitable distribution matters in New Jersey please contact our office at (201) 880-5563, for an appointment with one of our attorneys.


Disclaimer: The contents of this website are of general nature and not intended to be a substitute for legal advice or the formation of a lawyer-client relationship. In order to be properly represented, please contact your local professional. In addition, the information given on this website has been composed by a New Jersey attorney practicing exclusively in New Jersey. None of the information contained herein should be deemed to apply in other states, nor should this website be construed as an attempt by the author to practice law in any state other than New Jersey.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Invalidating a Contract under the Doctrine of Economic Duress

The doctrine of economic duress has significantly developed and expanded, in recognition of the ever-increasing complexity of the business world. Claims of economic duress in business litigation are becoming more frequent. Several courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have acknowledged that there are situations under which financial pressure may cancel an otherwise enforceable contract. See 13 S. Williston, Contracts, § 1603 at 664 (3d ed. 1970); United States v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 315 U.S. 289, 62 S.Ct. 581, 86 L.Ed. 855 (1942); Hartsville Oil Mill v. United States, 271 U.S. 43, 46 S.Ct. 389, 70 L.Ed. 822 (1926).The definition of economic duress is set forth in Williston:1. The party alleging economic duress must show that he has been the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act or threat, and2. Such act or threat must be one which deprives the victim of his unfettered will. [13 Williston, supra, § 1617 at 704 (footnotes omitted)]

The courts in New Jersey have defined eco…
Post a Comment
Read more

What is a Debt Buyer?

The basic business plan of the debt buying industry is to buy debt at pennies for the dollar. They usually by a list of consumer account without original documents to support these claims and without any documentation of how the “amount owing” was calculated.   The problem with this practice is that the debt buyer, has no incentive to obtain the proof required in a court of law because its investment is minimal. Typically a debt buyer sues consumers without any documentary proof that this particular consumer was indebted to the original creditor. . In every credit card account, the original creditor will possess: -           the debtor’s signed application/request for a credit card, 15 U.S.C. 1642 -           required monthly account statements, 15 U.S.C. 1637(b)  -           the credit card contract, amendments to the contract and -           charge slips or other evidence of each purchase and cash advance.          We always recommend our clients to defend these type of lawsuits so they …
Post a Comment
Read more

Service of Process in New Jersey: Court Allowed Service of Process by Facebook.

In the recent case of  K.I.A.  v. J.L. Docket No. C-157-15 (Ch. Div., April 11, 2016), the court held that when service of process cannot be done by traditional means the rules of civil procedure allow an alternate form of service, like Facebook.  Rule 4:4-4(b)(3) permits a court to enter an order permitting service by means other than those provided by rule “consistent with due process.” This is the case of an adoptive parents filed a cause of action against the defendant to enjoin him from contacting their adoptive son, remove information about their son from social media and to contact their family. Defendant an out of State individual contacted plaintiffs’ child through Facebook, disclosed that he was the biological father and contacted the family. In their attempt to serve the summons and complaint to the defendant, plaintiffs’ made reasonable, good-faith attempt to effectuate personal service but were unsuccessful.  The plaintiffs made a request for the court to order substitut…
Post a Comment
Read more