On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Burlington County, Docket No. FD-03-962-08.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Before Judges Grall and Messano.
Plaintiff Cynthia Denapoli and defendant Daniel Cusella have a child. On June 2, 2009, defendant filed a notice of appeal from a child support order entered on April 17, 2009. The notice also states defendant's intention to challenge child support orders issued in February and July 2008.
Due to the date on which the notice of appeal was filed, we do not have jurisdiction to review the orders issued in 2008. See R. 2:4-1(a); R. 2:4-4(a). Accordingly, the appeal from those orders is dismissed.
With respect to the order of April 17, 2009, defendant has not provided an adequate record to permit us to review his claims. It is clear that the child support order in question was entered on recommendation of a hearing officer, dated April 16, 2009, and signed by a judge of the Family Part on April 17, 2009. The procedure is governed by Rule 5:25-3. What is not clear is whether defendant requested a de novo appeal before a judge of the Family Part or filed a motion seeking relief from the hearing officer's recommendation as authorized by Rule 5:23-5(d)(2).
Defendant has not provided a record of a proceeding before the hearing officer or the judge of the Family Part. For that reason, review of defendant's objections to the April 17, 2009 order is impossible, and we have no alternative other than to affirm on the ground that defendant has failed to establish error warranting relief from the order. Society Hill Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Society Hill Assocs., 347 N.J. Super. 163, 177-78 (App. Div. 2002).
Defendant's appeal from the orders of February and July 2008 is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The order of April 17, 2009 is affirmed.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw ...