DEBORAH A. CONTE VS. DAVID S. AINSWORTH (FD-12-0446-93, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-3337-15T1
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.Aug 31, 2017Background
- Parties entered a 1992 agreement setting parenting time and child support; father agreed to pay support until the child was "deemed emancipated."
- Child born 1992; graduated Caldwell University (B.A.) in May 2015 and immediately enrolled in a two-year Master's program in mental health counseling at the same school, living with mother.
- Father had not exercised parenting time and met the child only after she became an adult.
- One month after the child's graduation, father reduced weekly support from $330 to $250 and moved (Aug. 2015) to declare the child emancipated and terminate support.
- Mother cross-moved seeking higher support, arrears, contribution to graduate-school costs, reimbursement of half of student loans, financial disclosures, and counsel fees; trial court granted emancipation and terminated father's support obligation.
- Appellate court reversed and remanded for further proceedings, concluding the court erred by treating the parents' agreement as dispositive of emancipation without evaluating the child's actual emancipation and related support needs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Conte) | Defendant's Argument (Ainsworth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the child is emancipated upon college graduation per the parties' agreement | Agreement definition is not binding on the child; court must evaluate emancipation using Newburgh factors and the child’s needs/resources | Agreement term is binding; graduation ends support | Court held trial court erred: parties' agreement is not dispositive; emancipation requires fact-based analysis, so remand required |
| Whether father must contribute to graduate-school costs | Father may be required to contribute if child is unemancipated and Newburgh factors support contribution | Father not obligated because no parent–child relationship and child enrolled without consulting him | Court instructed Newburgh factors must be considered on remand to determine obligation to contribute to higher education |
| Burden of proof on emancipation after majority | Mother argues court should have applied Newburgh and examined child's dependence and resources | Father contends graduation creates emancipation under agreement | Court reiterated that majority creates prima facie emancipation, but party seeking continued support must rebut by showing dependence; fact inquiry required |
| Trial court's failure to rule on other relief (arrears, reimbursement, disclosures, fees) | Requests were not explicitly decided; remand needed for explicit rulings | Implicit denial when emancipation granted | Court agreed and directed explicit rulings on outstanding cross-motion requests on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Newburgh v. Arrigo, 88 N.J. 529 (1982) (sets multi-factor test for post-secondary support and emancipation analysis)
- Gac v. Gac, 186 N.J. 535 (2006) (contribution to higher education is a form of child support)
- Patetta v. Patetta, 358 N.J. Super. 90 (App. Div. 2003) (parental right to terminate support by agreement is limited; child’s right cannot be waived by parents)
- Burns v. Edwards, 367 N.J. Super. 29 (App. Div. 2004) (parents expected to support children until emancipation regardless of residence)
- Filippone v. Lee, 304 N.J. Super. 301 (App. Div. 1997) (after majority, burden shifts to party seeking continued support to rebut presumption of emancipation)
- Philipp v. Stahl, 344 N.J. Super. 262 (App. Div. 2001) (absence of parent–child relationship is a factor in post-secondary support determinations)