EDITH L. CRUZ-CHASE v. V. FELIX A. DEJESUS

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3864-06T13864-06T1

EDITH L. CRUZ-CHASE,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

V.

FELIX A. DEJESUS,

Defendant-Appellant.

___________________________

 

 
Submitted January 8, 2008 - Remanded

Resubmitted April 4, 2008 - Decided

Before Judges Winkelstein and LeWinn.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Camden County, Docket No. FD-04-4028-07.

John M. Holliday, attorney for appellant.

South Jersey Legal Services, attorney for respondent (Leslie Barnes, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

On March 12, 2008, we remanded this matter to the Family Part for further findings of fact, pursuant to Rule 1:7-4, on the issues of (1) defendant's child support obligation for the parties' son, and (2) defendant's obligation to contribute to the son's college expenses. Cruz-Chase v. DeJesus, Docket No. A-3864-06 (March 12, 2008), slip op. at 8, 11. We required compliance with the remand to be completed within forty-five days, and we retained jurisdiction.

On April 4, 2008, we received from the trial judge an order and "Opinion of the Court on Remand From the Appellate Division." Neither party has sought to file any supplemental arguments in this court. Therefore, we now resolve this matter based upon the April 4 submissions.

Having reviewed the trial judge's decision on remand, and having once again reviewed the trial record, we affirm the order of April 3, 2008, for the reasons stated in that supplemental decision. In a twenty-page opinion, that fully complies with Rule 1:7-4, the trial judge thoroughly addressed and analyzed both (1) the statutory factors governing child support, N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23(a)(1) to (10); and the factors in Newburgh v. Arrigo, 88 N.J. 529 (19982). The judge's findings and conclusions "are supported by adequate, substantial and credible evidence[,]" and, therefore, are "considered binding on appeal[.]" Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 483-84 (1974).

 
Affirmed.

Footnote continued on next page.

2

A-3864-06T1

March 12, 2008

May 13, 2008