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.

Bischoff v. Bischoff

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

July 18, 2013

ROBERT R. BISCHOFF, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CAROL L. BISCHOFF, Defendant-Respondent.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted May 28, 2013

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Somerset County, Docket No. FM-18-403-10.

Michele Walter, attorney for appellant.

Carol L. Bischoff, respondent pro se.

Before Judges Graves and Guadagno.

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff Robert R. Bischoff appeals from the final judgment of divorce entered by the Family Part on March 1, 2012, after a trial. He challenges the trial court's calculation of his child support obligation, claiming the court failed to credit him with additional overnights and abatement during the children's vacations. We affirm.

The parties were married in 1997 and have two children who are now sixteen and nine. Plaintiff filed for divorce in 2009 and the case came to trial in February 2012. After testimony began, the parties settled most of the issues, reserving certain aspects regarding parenting time and child support for the trial court to decide.

In a marital settlement agreement dated February 14, 2012, the parties agreed to joint legal custody of the two children, with defendant being the parent of primary residence. During the school year, from September through June, plaintiff has parenting time Tuesday and Thursday evenings as well as on alternate weekends. The parties agreed that the weekends would begin on Friday after school but could not agree when the children would return to defendant. Defendant wanted the children returned to her on Sunday evening while plaintiff sought to extend his visitation until Monday.

Judge Thomas C. Miller took additional testimony on the disputed issues and interviewed the oldest child. After considering all the statutory factors, Judge Miller denied plaintiff's request for the Sunday overnight and set his child support obligation at $238 per week. On appeal, plaintiff presents the following arguments:

POINT I
THE COURT'S INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM "OVERNIGHT" CONSTITUTED HARMFUL ERROR BY DENYING THE APPELLANT THE ABILITY TO HAVE CHILD SUPPORT CALCULATED TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL OVERNIGHT ON SUNDAY EVEN THOUGH THE APPELLANT HAS THE CHILDREN FROM SUNDAY AT 12:00 A.M. TO 7:00 P.M. WHICH [IN] APPENDIX IX-A STATES THAT AN ...

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.