New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
792 A.2d 525 (2002)
Lily Isaacson (plaintiff) and Joel Scott Isaacson (defendant) divorced in 1996 and entered into an agreement that Lily would have primary custody of their two girls, then ages seven and nine. In 1996, Joel’s income was $180,000, and Lily’s was zero, except for short-term alimony of $2,600 per month. At the time of the divorce, Joel agreed to pay $2,400 per month in total child support, plus unreimbursed medical expenses, summer camp costs, and $800 per month for 1996 and 1997 toward the girls’ private school tuition, with future tuition payments to be negotiated. Two years later, when her alimony was about to expire, Lily filed for modification of child support. At the time, Joel was making more than $550,000 per year, and Lily was working and making $50,000 per year. The trial court ordered support in the amount of $3,500 total per month, or $42,000 per year, without considering Lily’s income. The maximum gross family income provided for in the support guidelines was $225,000 per year, which would have resulted in child support of $34,000 per year for two children. The court considered the maturation of the children and the standard of living and economic circumstances of both parents in its award. The trial court rejected Lily’s argument that support should triple because Joel’s income tripled. The court maintained Joel’s responsibility for private school tuition at 79 percent, reasoning that he would be paying greater educational expenses as time went on. Both Lily and Joel appeal.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Carchman, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.