What are some other important cases that have addressed the issue of the terminal date to determine equitable distribution?
A. Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, 83 N.J. 198 (1980). Here, the Brandenburg’s separated in 1966. In February 1976, some ten years after the parties separated, Mr. Brandenburg filed for divorce. The court held that “The cases following Painter recognize that there can be reliable indicia of an end of the marital partnership other than the filing of a complaint for divorce.” The court ultimately denied Mr. Brandenburg’s request for a deviation from the bright line rule. However, the court did acknowledge that if there is a “reliable indicia of an end to the marital partnership,” then a deviation may be appropriate. B. Genovese v. Genovese, 392 N.J. Super. 215 (App. Div. 2007). Here, the husband filed for a complaint for divorce in New York in 1994. A divorce was granted in New York in 1994. The husband eventually got remarried. In May 1999, the New York Appellate Court reversed the case and dismissed it. The court found that there was insufficient evidence to establish the cause of action f
Related Questions
- Clearly the issue that must be addressed in relocation cases in Texas is whether the circumstances of the child or conservator materially and substantially changed, and is a modification to either permit, or prohibit, a move in the best interest of the child?
- What are some other important cases that have addressed the issue of the terminal date to determine equitable distribution?
- Why is the terminal date for equitable distribution so important?
