Judge Determined She Needed a Final Restraining Order (“FRO”) to Protect Her from Future Harm Due to The Parties Prior Domestic Violence History

November 2, 2022 |

C.M.C. v. M.J.C. Docket No. A-0070-21 Decided October 26, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Family Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal of a final restraining order (“FRO”) entered against him and in favor of the plaintiff, his daughter, based on the predicate act of simple…

Excessive Logjam in Expungement Process a Disservice to the Public

October 27, 2022 |

FRO Was Necessary to Protect Plaintiff Was Based on the History of Domestic Violence

October 27, 2022 |

C.L.D. v. L.R.L. Docket No. A-0595-21 Decided October 24, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Family Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal of a final restraining order (“FRO”) entered against her and in favor of the plaintiff and a subsequent order denying her motion for reconsideration.…

Motion To Suppress Evidence Recovered After an Officer Approached Him in the Parking Lot

October 27, 2022 |

State of New Jersey v. Matthew Duffy Docket No. A-0641-21 Decided October 21, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence recovered after an officer approached him in the parking lot of Great…

FRO Trial Did Not Violate Defendant’s Due Process Rights and She Failed to Show Any Prejudice

October 27, 2022 |

E.L.C. v. D.M.F. Docket No. A-3033-20 Decided October 21, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Family Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal of a final restraining order (“FRO”) entered against her and in favor of the plaintiff. The parties were married in 2015 and were in…

Final Restraining Order (“FRO”) Upheld Based on the Predicate Act of Harassment

October 24, 2022 |

G.S. v. K.S. Docket No. A-3390-20 Decided October 20, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Family Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal of a final restraining order (“FRO”) entered against him and in favor of the plaintiff based on the predicate act of harassment. Plaintiff filed…

Final Restraining Order Dismissed; Civil Restraints Under the Parties’ Previous Consent Order Continued

October 24, 2022 |

K.S. v. S.H. Docket No. A-0650-21 Decided October 20, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Family Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided plaintiff’s appeal of an order denying her application for a final restraining order (“FRO”), dismissing her domestic violence complaint, and dissolving her temporary restraining order (“TRO”)…

Final Restraining Order (FRO) Appealed, Arguing Due Process Was Violated by Proceeding Over Zoom Instead of In-Person

October 19, 2022 |

R.M.M. v. E.S.M. DOCKET NO. A-0441-21 Decided October 18, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Family Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished decision, the Appellate Division of New Jersey affirmed a Final Restraining Order (FRO) against Defendant despite his objections of proceeding of the virtual platform Zoom. In R.M.M. v. E.S.M., plaintiff received a Temporary Restraining…

Appeal of Judgment of Conviction and Order Denying Motion to Be Readmitted into the Pretrial Intervention Program (“PTI”)

October 19, 2022 |

State of New Jersey v. Jazmine Holloway Docket No. A-0107-20 Decided October 14, 2022 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Court of New Jersey decided defendant’s appeal of her judgment of conviction and the order denying her motion to be readmitted into the Pretrial Intervention Program (“PTI”).…

Standard of Review Administrative Law Decision

October 18, 2022 |

Our scope of review of an administrative agency’s final determination is limited. In re Herrmann, 192 N.J. 19, 27 (2007). A “strong presumption of reasonableness attaches” to the agency’s decision. In re Carroll, 339 N.J. Super. 429, 437 (App. Div. 2001) (quoting In re Vey, 272 N.J. Super. 199, 205 (App. Div. 1993), aff’d, 135…