J.R. v. L.R.
New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
386 N.J. Super. 475, 902 A.2d 261 (2006)
The marriage between L.R. (plaintiff) and J.R. (plaintiff) produced one child, Nicholas, but it was an unstable relationship. One night after an argument, L.R. went to a bar, met S.G. (defendant), and had sexual intercourse with him. As a result, L.R. became pregnant and gave birth to a daughter, Jessica. However, L.R. did not inform J.R. that he was not Jessica’s real father until an argument that occurred when Jessica was nine years old. The couple separated. Later, L.R. filed a complaint against J.R. for support of both children, which the judge ordered J.R. to pay. J.R. then filed a motion for paternity testing, which was granted. Because the results showed that J.R. was not Jessica’s biological father, the child-support order was modified to apply only to Nicholas. J.R. moved out of the state, and his relationship with Jessica deteriorated. L.R. contacted S.G., told him that he had a daughter with her, and requested financial support. S.G. refused. L.R. filed a paternity complaint against S.G. Around the same time, J.R. filed for a reduction in child support and joint custody of Nicholas and Jessica. J.R. also sought to compel L.R. to make Jessica’s biological father available for a support hearing. J.R.’s motion and L.R.’s paternity complaint were consolidated. The judge determined that Jessica wanted to know the identity of her real father and that a paternity test of S.G. would therefore be in Jessica’s best interests. The test established that S.G. was Jessica’s father, though S.G. wanted no relationship with Jessica. The judge further determined that Jessica’s child-support needs were $150 per week—an amount that S.G. was deemed financially unable to pay. It was ordered that J.R. and S.G. would each pay $75 per week. S.G. appealed (J.R. did not). The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Collester, 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 725,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead 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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 725,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,700 briefs, keyed to 983 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.