CAPE MAY COUNTY BOARD OF SOCIAL SERVICES v. HEATHER L. HODSDEN

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1310-12T3

CAPE MAY COUNTY BOARD OF

SOCIAL SERVICES,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

HEATHER L. HODSDEN,

Defendant-Appellant.

_______________________________

May 23, 2014

Submitted March 12, 2014 Decided

Before Judges Grall and Nugent.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Special Civil Part, Cape May County, Docket No. DC-0536-12.

Heather L. Hodsden, appellant pro se.

Barbara L. Bakley-Marino, Cape May County Counsel, attorney for respondent (James B. Arsenault, Jr., Assistant County Counsel, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

The Cape May County Board of Social Services (Board) filed a complaint in the Superior Court, Law Division, Special Civil Part, to recover overpayments of benefits made to defendant Heather L. Hodsden, a participant in the WorkFirst New Jersey General Assistance and Food Stamps programs and Medicaid. The Board overpaid because defendant had not reported certain employment or her receipt of unemployment benefits during specified benefits periods. Following a bench trial, the judge determined that the Board established the amount due, defendant's legal obligation to repay it and the Board's entitlement to costs and a statutory attorney's fee. Accordingly, judgment was entered in the total amount of $4757.82, consisting of $4593.94 for benefits overpaid, $57 for costs and a statutorily capped attorney's fee of $106.88.

Defendant appeals, arguing that the judge did not take into account the administrative errors she pointed out and was unsympathetic to the plight of those who do not have medical insurance. Although the brief does not include any citations to the record or law supporting defendant's claims, see R. 2:6-2(a)(3),(4),(5); R.2:9-9, we have considered the arguments on the merits and in light of the record and determined that they have insufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). We affirm because the judgment is based on findings of fact that are adequately supported by the record. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(A).