DANA HEADLEY v. MICHAEL K. MATTHYS

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-2783-05T52783-05T5

DANA HEADLEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

MICHAEL H. MATTHYS,

Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________________

 
Telephonically Argued March 7, 2007 -

Decided March 29, 2007

Before Judges Winkelstein and Fuentes.

On appeal from Superior Court of New

Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part,

Cape May County, Docket No. FV-05-211-06.

A. Harold Kokes argued the cause for

appellant.

Lisa M. Radell argued the cause for

respondent.

PER CURIAM

Defendant Michael K. Matthys appeals from a final domestic violence restraining order issued by the Family Part on December 19, 2005. We affirm. After reviewing the evidence presented to the trial court, we are satisfied that defendant's arguments lack sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). Plaintiff's testimony describing defendant's brutal physical attack and the resulting injuries sustained therefrom amply support the trial judge's factual findings.

 
Affirmed.

___________________________________

FUENTES, J.A.D., concurring.

I am compelled to write separately to comment on defense counsel's utter disregard for the most rudimentary requirements of the rules governing appellate practice in this State. Defendant's "brief" did not include a recitation of the material facts as required by R. 2:6-2(a)(4); the narrative following the argument point headings was devoid of analysis, and failed to cite a single case in support of the conclusions advocated therein, in violation of R. 2:6-2(a)(5).

Under these circumstances, we were forced to scour through the trial record, and conduct our own independent research in an effort to determine whether any of defendant's so-called arguments had any merit. Defense counsel's failure to adhere to this court's procedural requirements is unacceptable, and presents clear grounds for the imposition of sanctions under R. 2:9-9. See Miraph Enters. Inc. v. Bd. of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 150 N.J. Super. 504, 507-08 (App. Div. 1977).

 

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-2783-05T5

RECORD IMPOUNDED

1

A-2783-05T5

RECORD IMPOUNDED

March 29, 2007