WILLIAM M. FETKY v. DOMINICK THERESA

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1251-05T21251-05T2

WILLIAM M. FETKY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

DOMINICK THERESA,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

 

Submitted May 9, 2006 - Decided May 25, 2006

Before Judges Lefelt and Seltzer.

On appeal from the Superior Court of

New Jersey, Law Division, Middlesex

County, Docket No. DJ-277043-99.

Appellant, Dominick Theresa,

submitted a pro se brief.

Stark & Stark, attorneys for

respondent (William H. Brosha and

Scott I. Unger, of counsel and

on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Defendant Dominick Theresa was a litigant in a divorce action in which plaintiff, attorney William Fetky, represented defendant's wife. Defendant appeals from an order by Judge Mathias Rodriguez that, after a levy, directed the turnover of funds contained in defendant's checking account.

The current collection action is an attempt by plaintiff to recover a fee award, which plaintiff alleges was awarded by Judge Garrenger in the divorce action. Defendant argues that Judge Rodriguez erred in granting the turnover because Judge Garrenger never circled "granted" in the judgment of divorce, and Judge Rodriguez was biased, prejudiced, rude, and derogatory.

Our review of the record, in light of defendant's arguments and the pertinent law, reveals clearly that Judge Garrenger awarded the fee, a proper judgment was entered, and the turnover correctly ordered. Furthermore, the transcript does not disclose any bias, prejudice, rudeness, or derogatory behavior by Judge Rodriguez. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

 
Affirmed.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-1251-05T2

May 25, 2006