Pretrial Brief

1511 Words4 Pages

COMES NOW, the Defendant, Gary H. Rappold, and files this, his Pretrial Brief, and further alleges: 1. The subject presented on this brief is the appropriate legal and fair adjudication of the contested issues for equitable distribution, alimony, and counsel fees in addition to the affirmation of the Plaintiff’s ability to be gainfully employed and capacity to contribute to her own support. 2. Plaintiff is requesting an equitable distribution award of $140,000, permanent alimony in the amount of $350 per week, and payments of her counsel fees (Exhibit A). Defendant believes these requests are exorbitant, unreasonable, and without merit. This opinion is consistent with longstanding precedent of NJ statutory and case law. 3. In short, the Defendant shall present irrefutable documentary evidence as well as decisive inferences complying with NJ law to validate his position, in contrast with the Plaintiff’s exhaustive and misguided litigation stratagem, irrelevant and deficient evidence, and undue reliance on flawed suspicions. 4. The Complaint for Divorce was filed on August 8, 2013. An Answer and Counterclaim for Divorce were filed by Defendant on September 12, 2013. 5. A Motion for Pendente Lite Relief was filed by Plaintiff on August 28, 2013. Defendant filed Cross-Motion to preceding motion on September 18, 2013. On the return date October 3, 2013, (a) Order for Defendant to pay Robert W. Mayer $5,000.00 retainer was denied without prejudice, (b) Order to freeze all accounts of Gary H. Rappold was denied, (c) Order to exempt Defendant’s checking account from being frozen to pay all monthly and day-to-day expenses was granted, (d) Order for Defendant to pay pendente lite alimony to ... ... middle of paper ... ...ility. 24. The Defendant's inability to retain counsel and his inferior bargaining position to defend against an action of divorce should not allow the Plaintiff to be afforded further leverage by reason of the inequality of representation. 25. New Jersey law requires a Court to consider the earning capacities, educational levels, vocational skills, and employability of the parties in deciding alimony and equitable distribution. Defendant offers clear and convincing evidence to refute Plaintiff’s inability to be gainfully employed. For the foregoing reasons, the Court should decide to impute the germane income to the Plaintiff for purposes of calculating alimony and allocation of marital debt. Furthermore, the Plaintiff’s petition for a cash reward and payment of her counsel fees must be dismissed with prejudice.

More about Pretrial Brief

Open Document