Lisa Llewelyn v. James Shewchuk
111 A.3d 1132
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2015Background
- Appellant Adrianna Shewchuk, the adult daughter, appealed a Family Part order terminating child support for emancipation.
- The court granted the motion to emancipate based on appellant leaving the mother’s home, moving in with her biological father, and not rejoining the parental household.
- Plaintiff consented to the emancipation, after appellant moved out in December 2012 and stayed away from the primary residence.
- Appellant argued she remained dependent, a student, and financially supported by others, so emancipation should not be granted.
- The trial court relied on Filippone v. Lee to find emancipation due to moving beyond parental influence and obtaining independent status.
- The Appellate Division affirmed, applying a de novo legal review to emancipation standards and upholding the presumption of emancipation with a lack of material factual dispute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether emancipation was correctly found as a legal matter | Shewchuk remained dependent and in school | Appellant voluntarily left home and became independent | Emancipation affirmed; presumption overcome by independence |
| Whether a plenary hearing was required given disputed factors | Disputes about independence and support warranted a hearing | No genuine dispute; motion record sufficient | No plenary hearing required; record supported emancipation |
| Whether moving out alone suffices for emancipation | Residence away from parents not automatically emancipation | Voluntary move and independence justify emancipation | Yes; moving beyond parental sphere and obtaining independent status supports emancipation |
| Role of medical/educational needs in emancipation decision | Appellant’s health issues require continued support | Health issues do not negate independence when other factors show autonomy | Not dispositive; independence shown by living arrangement and support from others |
Key Cases Cited
- Filippone v. Lee, 304 N.J. Super. 301 (App. Div. 1997) (emancipation analysis hinges on independence from parental sphere)
- Newburgh v. Arrigo, 88 N.J. 529 (Supreme Court 1982) (education and need can affect support obligations after majority)
- Dolce v. Dolce, 383 N.J. Super. 11 (App. Div. 2006) (emancipation factors include need, resources, and independence considerations)
- Pascale v. Pascale, 140 N.J. 583 (Supreme Court 1995) (parents owe support consistent with prior standard of living for children)
- N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. W.F., 434 N.J. Super. 288 (App. Div.) (post‑majority financial duty may exist in appropriate circumstances)
- Hand v. Hand, 391 N.J. Super. 102 (App. Div. 2007) (plenary hearing required only for genuine, material disputes)
- Segal v. Lynch, 211 N.J. 230 (Supreme Court 2012) (emphasizes limited plenary hearing standards in family matters)
- M.M. v. D.Y.F.S., 189 N.J. 261 (Supreme Court 2007) (high court on elder and dependent relationships in family proceedings)