Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Innes v. Innes

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided January 17, 1990Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partStein, J.

This case involves an important issue of matrimonial law. The question concerns the Chancery Division’s authority, on a husband’s motion to modify an alimony obligation set forth in a property-settlement agreement, to consider the husband’s monthly benefit payments from a pension that was treated as an asset for purposes of equitable distribution when the parties divorced. Reversing the Appellate Division, the Court today holds that prior decisional law absolutely bars such consideration of the pension benefit. The Court also holds that a recent amendment to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23, A. 1988, c.…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Lepis v. LepisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
  2. Rothman v. RothmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1974
  3. State v. ButlerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
  4. Gibbons v. GibbonsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  5. Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1977

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API