MARK A. FACCONE v. JENNIFER L. JOHNSTON

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3092-11T2

MARK A. FACCONE,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JENNIFER L. JOHNSTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________

Argued April 29, 2013 Decided May 13, 2013

 
Before Judges Parrillo and Fasciale.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Ocean County, Docket No. FM-15-1065-11.

Brian D. Winters argued the cause for appellant (Keith, Winters & Wenning, LLC, attorneys; Jennifer L. Johnston, on the pro se brief).

Mark A. Faccone, respondent, argued the cause pro se.

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a January 13, 2012 Judgment of Divorce (JOD). She challenges Judge Patricia Roe's ruling requiring that defendant pay alimony of $250 per week for three years. We affirm.

Judge Roe conducted a two-day trial in which the sole disputed issue was alimony. The judge listened to testimony from the parties on the first day of trial, and then issued her extensive and well-reasoned oral opinion on the second day. The judge carefully considered the alimony factors pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23b, made credibility findings, and then entered the JOD.

On appeal, defendant argues primarily that there is insufficient evidence to support the judge's findings of fact. As a result, defendant requests that we reconsider the judge's decision.

The scope of appellate review of the family part's fact finding is limited. Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394, 411 (1998). "We grant substantial deference to a trial court's findings of facts and conclusions of law, which will only be disturbed if they are 'manifestly unsupported by or inconsistent with the competent, relevant[,] and reasonably credible evidence.'" Crespo v. Crespo, 395 N.J. Super. 190, 193-94 (App. Div. 2007) (quoting Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 484 (1974)). Additionally, "[b]ecause of the family courts' special jurisdiction and expertise in family matters, appellate courts should accord deference to family court factfinding." Cesare, supra, 154 N.J. at 413. Settled principles provide that we will reverse only when our review unearths findings that "'are so wholly un-supportable as to result in a denial of justice.'" Colca v. Anson, 413 N.J. Super. 405, 413 (App. Div. 2010) (quoting Meshinsky v. Nichols Yacht Sales, Inc., 110 N.J. 464, 475 (1988)).

We have carefully considered the record and defendant's arguments and affirm substantially for the reasons that Judge Roe expressed in her oral opinion dated January 13, 2012.