Borra v. Borra
New Jersey Superior Court
333 N.J. Super. 607, 756 A.2d 647 (2000)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
William E. Borra III (plaintiff) was married to Jill Borra (defendant), and they had two sons. For many years, the Borras belonged to a country club, acquired in William’s name per the club’s regulations with joint marital funds. Jill was extensively involved in club activities, including chairing functions, hosting dinners, and coordinating and fundraising for golf tournaments. The children regularly took golf lessons, went swimming, and participated in events at the club. The Borras separated in 1999, and both continued using the club facilities without any incident. The divorce was finalized in 2000, at which time the children were ages 18 and 11. As part of the settlement, William obtained the club membership, while Jill was allowed to use the club as a “guest” only, which limited her club use to once every 30 days. The children could continue their regular programs and activities. Jill submitted a formal application for club membership in her own name. William intended to formally object to her application before the governing board of the club. William opposed Jill’s application because, as he testified, he would feel embarrassed and uncomfortable if Jill were to encounter him or any female companion that he might bring with him to the club. Jill sought and received a court injunction to prevent William’s formal objection. William filed a motion for reconsideration.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Torack, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
