Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Klingenberger v. Klingenberger

March 5, 2009

PAUL KLINGENBERGER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
BLANCH KLINGENBERGER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Essex County, FM-07-904-03F.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted November 13, 2008

Before Judges A. A. Rodríguez and Payne.

Defendant, Blanch Klingenberger (wife), appeals from orders entered by a judge of the Family Part on November 26, 2007 and December 11, 2007 that resolved issues between the parties concerning payment of expenses for the parties' two children and set the amount of child support payments by plaintiff, Paul Klingenberger (husband). Husband has not cross-appealed.

I.

The record discloses that the parties were married on June 5, 1986 and divorced on August 21, 2003. Both were born in Peru. The parties have two children, a daughter, born on May 25, 1988, and a son born on April 12, 2000.

The judgment of divorce incorporated a property settlement agreement (PSA) between the parties, which provided that husband and wife would share joint legal custody of the two children. Wife would have residential custody of the son, and husband would have residential custody of the daughter. The agreement provided that each party would have parenting time with the two children together every other weekend from Friday evening to Sunday at 6 p.m. Additionally each would have parenting time on one evening per week. Holidays were to be split equally, and the parties agreed that each could have up to three weeks of vacation time with the children. The PSA further provided that if wife traveled to Peru with the children for vacation, husband would pay the air fare for the daughter. If husband traveled to Peru with the children for vacation, wife would pay one-third of the son's air fare.

Pursuant to the PSA, husband's child support obligation for the son was $244 per week, including $125 per week in child care expense. Wife's child support obligation was set at $95 per week. Thus, husband was required to pay wife the net amount of $149 per week. Payment of permanent alimony by husband to wife in the amount of $100 per week was also specified.

The PSA provided that wife was to obtain medical insurance for the children so long as it remained at no cost to her. If costs were imposed, then the cost of the insurance would be added to the child support guidelines calculation so as to apportion the cost to the parties. The PSA also provided that the children's unreimbursed medical expenses would be shared by the parties. The parent having residential custody of the child would pay the first $250. Thereafter, expenses would be apportioned at thirty-six percent to wife and sixty-four percent to husband. The PSA was silent regarding the apportionment of any educational expense incurred prior to college.

From February 2005 to August 2005, the daughter underwent treatment for drug addiction in Peru, incurring $4,355 in medical expenses and $1,057 in airfare costs that were paid by husband. At the hearings in this matter and on appeal, wife claims that she did not agree to send the daughter to Peru, and that she should not be held responsible for the costs of treatment. However, in a certification dated June 11, 2007, wife stated:

[The daughter] had serious substance abuse problems during the time of the divorce.

After the divorce Plaintiff and I agreed to send her to a program in our home country of Peru.

In her brief on appeal wife contends, alternatively, that she should, at most, be held responsible for thirty-six percent of the costs incurred in treatment. She also argues that her child support obligation ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.