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.

Spadaccini v. Main

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

June 25, 2013

DINO SPADACCINI, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
KEVIN H. MAIN, Defendant, and LISA MARIN MAIN, Defendant-Respondent.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted June 18, 2013

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Mercer County, Docket No. L-3212-10.

Saldutti, L.L.C., attorneys for appellant (Thomas B. O'Connell, of counsel and on the brief).

Szaferman Lakind Blumstein & Blader, P.C., attorneys for respondent (Daniel S. Sweetser, of counsel and on the brief).

Before Judges Fisher and Grall.

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff Dino Spadaccini and defendant Kevin H. Main practiced law as Spadaccini Main from April 2002 through July 2010. Defendant Kevin H. Main (Main) and his wife, defendant Lisa Marin Main (Marin Main), purchased real property in Pennington in 2002. The July 2010 transfer of this property from Main and Marin Main, jointly, to Marin Main alone, forms the basis for Spadaccini's filing of the complaint in this matter for, among other things, relief based on the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA), N.J.S.A. 25:2-20 to -34. In light of the resolution of all aspects of defendants' marital relationship in a divorce action, the trial judge in this matter granted summary judgment in favor of Marin Main.

Plaintiff appeals, arguing:

I.THE LAW DIVISION ERRED BY FAILING TO FIND FAVORABLE INFERENCES IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF IN THE PRESENCE OF GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT.
II. THE COURT BELOW ERRED BY FAILING TO APPLY THE ADVERSE INFERENCES OF THE UFTA.
III. THE COURT BELOW FAILED TO MAKE THE REQUISITE FINDINGS OF FACT.

We find insufficient merit in these arguments to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). We add only the following brief comments.

The UFTA action brought by plaintiff against Main and Marin Main has its genesis in malpractice liabilities incurred by Spadaccini Main that resulted from an agreement the law firm had with another law firm regarding the referral of workers' compensation and personal injury claims. In this action, plaintiff asserted that Main avoided his responsibility for his share of the firm's losses by transferring ...


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.