Child Support

Motion For Additional Discovery Denied As Not Relevant To Motion To Modify Child Support

In the family law, child support modification case of Siegel v. Siegel, App. Div. 20-2-5797, the plaintiff appealed from a Family Part order denying her motion for additional discovery of her former husband’s financial status and denying without prejudice her motion to reevaluate defendant’s child support obligation pending a review of his financial documents. She also requested clarification of the order expounding each party’s financial obligation as to the children’s extraordinary expenses. The panel affirmed in part and denied in part. Plaintiff’s appeal of the denial of her motion to modify child support was denied because the denial, which was without prejudice, was interlocutory. The denial of plaintiff’s demand for documentation supporting the expenses listed in defendant’s 2012 CIS was affirmed because the expenses were not relevant to plaintiff’s motion to modify child support. The court did provide plaintiff with clarification regarding the court order that the parties split the children’s extraordinary expenses 80-20. However, the panel declined to address plaintiff’s request that the court “establish…how (the 80/20 split) should be enforced by either penalties or determining another avenue that the defendant must comply with so that we could avoid coming to court on further motions,” finding that it was too vague.

Reference: Case & Analysis, New Jersey Law Journal, 219 N.J.L.J. 629 (February 23, 2015)

Filed Under: Family Law; Child Support

Please visit our Family Law & Child Support websites for more information on this topic.