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.

Magarino v. Magarino

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

December 10, 2013

SAMUEL A. MAGARINO, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
CRISTINA MAGARINO, Defendant-Appellant.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued December 2, 2013

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Sussex County, Docket No. FM-19-433-09.

Nancy C. Ferro argued the cause for appellant (Ferro & Ferro, attorneys; Ms. Ferro, of counsel and on the brief).

Bonnie C. Frost argued the cause for respondent (Einhorn, Harris, Ascher, Barbarito & Frost, P.C., attorneys; Ms. Frost, of counsel and on the brief).

Before Judges Harris, Kennedy, and Guadagno.

PER CURIAM

Defendant Cristina Magarino appeals from certain provisions — "child custody and financial issues" — contained in the May 24, 2011 dual judgment of divorce, and as modified by the May 31, 2011 supplemental order. We affirm.

I.

The parties met in September 2004, began living together in November 2004, and were married on June 6, 2006. Their only child, Manny, [1] was born fifty days later. Plaintiff filed for divorce on April 6, 2009; defendant's counterclaim was filed two months later. This was a short-duration marriage.

Plaintiff was general manager of Magarino Ford, a family-owned automobile dealership located in Sussex Borough. In 2008, his salary was approximately $185, 000. Defendant was a college graduate who initially stayed home to care for Manny at plaintiff's request. However, in December 2008, plaintiff requested that defendant return to work. Thereafter, she obtained employment as a receptionist; at the time of trial, defendant had stopped working and was a full-time student enrolled in pre-nursing school courses.

In June 2009, the parties filed domestic violence complaints against each other, and the court signed temporary restraining orders. Plaintiff moved out of the marital home, and began living with his parents. On June 25, 2009, pending a trial on the domestic violence complaints, the Family Part entered an order determining a parenting time schedule, which granted plaintiff two overnights and defendant five overnights each week. The parenting time schedule also provided that each party have daily telephone contact with Manny, and that defendant be permitted to reside in the marital home until July 31, 2009. On July 30, 2009, plaintiff dismissed his domestic violence complaint. On July 31, 2009, defendant began living in her parents' home in West Paterson.

On September 22, 2009, the parties signed a consent order confirming that both domestic violence complaints had been dismissed, and they agreed to have no further contact with each other except for non-harassing text messages concerning the pick-up, drop-off, or health emergencies concerning Manny. The parenting time schedule set forth in the June 25, 2009 order remained in effect.

On November 16, 2009, the court entered a comprehensive pendente lite order. Among its provisions were a requirement that plaintiff pay unallocated support of $350 per week to defendant, as well as, make car payments and pay automobile insurance for defendant's vehicle. The court also ordered that the parenting time schedule ...


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.