YVON BONHOMME v. ELDA M. PINCHINAT
Annotate this CaseNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-1689-04T21689-04T2
YVON BONHOMME,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
ELDA M. PINCHINAT,
Defendant-Appellant.
Submitted February 1, 2006 - Decided February 14, 2006
Before Judges Conley and Winkelstein.
On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Essex County, FV-07-380-05.
Carmen C. Rusignola, attorney for appellant (John Marmaras, on the brief).
Yvon Bonhomme, respondent pro se.
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals from a final restraining order issued by the Family Part on November 4, 2004. We affirm.
On July 19, 2004, plaintiff husband filed a domestic violence complaint against defendant wife, alleging that during their two-month marriage, defendant physically and verbally abused him. A testimonial hearing on plaintiff's complaint was held on November 4, 2004, where both parties appeared without counsel. The Family Part judge found that plaintiff was more credible than defendant, defendant threatened plaintiff, and in fact struck him three times. The judge concluded that "plaintiff's health, safety and well being is in danger from future acts of domestic violence."
The judge's findings of assaultive conduct by defendant were supported by substantial credible evidence in the record. Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394, 411-13 (1998); Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 484 (1974). Because of the Family Part's "special jurisdiction and expertise in family matters," we accord deference to the judge's fact-finding. Cesare, supra, id. at 413.
We have carefully considered defendant's arguments in light of the applicable law, and conclude that defendant's arguments are without sufficient merit to warrant further discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(A)&(E). We affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by the Family Part on November 4, 2004.
Affirmed.
(continued)
(continued)
2
A-1689-04T2
RECORD IMPOUNDED
February 14, 2006
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.