C.B v. JAMES ANTHONY LOBUE

Annotate this Case

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-0833-09T10833-09T1

C.B.,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JAMES ANTHONY LOBUE,

Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________________________________

Submitted May 26, 2010 - Decided June 8, 2010

Before Judges Graves and J.N. Harris.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey,

Chancery Division, Family Part, Ocean County,

Docket No. FV-15-000682-10.

James Lobue, appellant pro se.

Respondent has not filed a brief.

PER CURIAM

Defendant James Lobue appeals from a domestic violence final restraining order entered on September 24, 2009, pursuant to the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 to -35. He contends he never hit plaintiff, she was not injured, and the evidence failed to establish that a final restraining order was necessary to protect plaintiff from an immediate danger or to prevent further abuse. Nevertheless, defendant also acknowledges that he verbally abused plaintiff by "calling her names" and saying things that he "did not mean."

We are unable to determine whether there was sufficient credible evidence to support the trial court's decision because defendant has failed to provide a transcript of the trial as required by Rule 2:5-3. Consequently, the appeal must be dismissed.

The appeal is dismissed without prejudice to reinstatement in the event defendant orders a transcript of the trial, and the proper deposit is paid on or before July 15, 2010. If that occurs, defendant must file and serve a new brief and appendix with specific properly-cited references to the trial transcript within thirty days after the preparation of the transcript.

 
Dismissed without prejudice. Jurisdiction is not retained.

In defendant's notice of appeal and other appellate papers, he is incorrectly identified as plaintiff.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-0833-09T1

RECORD IMPOUNDED

 


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.