Search for: "Lepis v. Lepis"
Results 181 - 200
of 217
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jul 2009, 12:23 pm
” Lepis v. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 2:36 pm
” Lepis, supra, 83 N.J. at 148-51. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 12:50 pm
(quoting Lepis v. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 10:04 am
Lepis, supra, 83 N.J. at 152. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 8:32 am
See Lepis v. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 10:52 am
Super. at 469; see also Lepis v. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 11:20 am
” Lepis v. [read post]
23 Jul 2010, 9:45 am
See Lepis v. [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 7:11 am
It was upon these facts that the father claimed the existence of changed circumstances justifying a modification pursuant to Lepis v. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 2:54 pm
” Id. at 31 (citing Lepis v. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 12:16 pm
See Lepis v. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 6:19 am
Lepis, 83 N.J. 139 (1980); Crews v. [read post]
27 May 2010, 12:29 pm
” Lepis, supra, 83 N.J. at 157; see also Miller v. [read post]
21 Jun 2023, 6:26 am
The recent Appellate Division decision of Litton v. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 3:36 pm
In Galante v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 6:28 am
See Cox v. [read post]
20 Sep 2013, 4:12 pm
Lepis v. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 5:51 am
Faherty, 97 N.J. 99, 222 (1984): “child support [is] always subject to modification for changed circumstances…” Pursuant to Lepis v. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:30 am
Crews, 164 N.J. 11 (2000), and Lepis v. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 7:36 am
As for non-self-employed obligors: a) a variety of factors are enunciated for a court’s consideration, most of which are already considered as part of the process when an application to modify alimony is made pursuant to Lepis v. [read post]