Opinion

Mani v. Mani

  • 183 N.J. 70
  • 869 A.2d 904
  • 2005 N.J. LEXIS 298
Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Filed
Apr 6, 2005
Status
Published
Author
Wallace
On the bench
Long, Wallace, Rivera-Soto
Cited by
101 cases
Authority
More cited than 8.8%

explaining a court "must" consider these factors even though Rule 5:3-5(c) says a court "should" consider them

How later courts described this case

  • explaining a court "must" consider these factors even though Rule 5:3-5(c) says a court "should" consider them
  • noting that only economic fault, or depletion of family resources, may be considered in alimony awards

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

WALLACE, JR.,

concurring.

I concur in the result. Unlike the majority, I find no need to refine and expand upon when it is appropriate to use marital fault in determining an alimony award. I am satisfied with the view we expressed in Kinsella, supra, that “marital fault rarely enters in the calculus of an alimony award.” 150 N.J. at 315, 696 A.2d 556 . Our trial judges have consistently complied with that admonition as evidenced by the paucity of appeals in which fault is an issue in determining the amount of the award of alimony.

Moreover, in the present case, the trial judge did not consider fault in computing the alimony award. I find no abuse of discretion in that regard.

In all other respects I concur with the majority opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.