TRAVIS G. WALTSAK VS. JACQUELINE S. WALTSAK (FM-13-1637-17, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-0427-19
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 20, 2021Background
- Travis and Jacqueline Waltsak divorced in 2018 and share joint legal and physical custody of two children; dispute arose over where their older son (A.W.) should attend elementary school.
- The parties’ Custody and Parenting Time Agreement (CPTA) commits them to a continued Christian upbringing for the children and to consider all school options (public, private, out-of-district), with mediation if they cannot agree.
- Plaintiff moved to send A.W. to one of four nearby public schools; defendant sought to enroll A.W. at Ambassador Christian Academy (ACA), a private Christian school that had recently relocated to Wall Township.
- Plaintiff opposed ACA mainly because of prior church discipline he experienced at Grace Bible Church (with which ACA leases space) and concerns about a Bible-based curriculum and potential social exclusion; he presented internet ratings and a few negative parent reviews.
- Defendant (and ACA headmaster Nancy Mercadante) testified ACA is separate from the church, has open enrollment, favorable test scores, low student-teacher ratios, peer relationships for A.W., and that defendant would pay tuition.
- The Family Part found defendant and Mercadante credible, concluded ACA was in A.W.’s best interests (considering the CPTA, academics, proximity, peers, and parental involvement), denied plaintiff’s motion, granted defendant’s cross-motion, and ordered defendant to pay tuition. The Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Which school is in the child’s best interests? | Waltsak: Public school options are academically superior per online ratings; ACA’s church ties risk ostracism and limit plaintiff’s parental involvement. | Jacqueline: ACA provides strong academics in a Christian setting, proximity, existing peer ties, low ratios, and she will pay tuition; ACA is not controlled by the church. | Court: ACA is in A.W.’s best interests based on credible evidence (CPTA religious commitment, ACA academics, location, peers, ability for both parents to participate). |
| 2) May the court rely on its Rule 2:5-1(b) amplification on appeal? | Waltsak: Amplification improperly signed by two judges and refers to certifications not admitted at trial; should be disregarded. | Jacqueline: Amplification is permitted; judge who heard the case signed it; references were cumulative of trial evidence. | Court: Amplification proper under Rule 2:5-1(b); erroneous citations were cumulative and did not require reversal. |
| 3) Did the court misapply the CPTA or give improper deference to defendant? | Waltsak: Court ignored CPTA plain language, shifted burden to him, and treated defendant like primary residential parent. | Jacqueline: Court considered CPTA and gave effect to the parties’ agreed religious commitment while weighing all other best-interest factors. | Court: No misapplication; CPTA’s religious-education provisions were a factor among many; court did not defer to either parent based on custody. |
| 4) Are the court’s factual findings and credibility determinations unsupported? | Waltsak: Court made inaccurate factual recitations and credibility errors, relied on misleading/insufficient evidence. | Jacqueline: Credibility findings based on demeanor and record; testimony (including headmaster’s) supported findings. | Court: Appellate review defers to trial factfinding; findings were supported by adequate, substantial, credible evidence and were not manifestly unsupported. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Proposed Quest Acad. Charter Sch. of Montclair Founders Grp., 216 N.J. 370 (2013) (Rule 2:5-1(b) permits trial judge to file an amplification on appeal)
- Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394 (1998) (standard of deference to family court factual findings)
- Gnall v. Gnall, 222 N.J. 414 (2015) (facts will be upheld when supported by adequate, substantial, credible evidence)
- Levine v. Levine, 322 N.J. Super. 558 (App. Div. 1999) (factors for choosing among schools include academics, peer relationships, continuity, and community ties)
- Asch v. Asch, 164 N.J. Super. 499 (App. Div. 1978) (courts may consider parents’ religious preferences at child’s birth when choosing a school)
- J.B. v. W.B., 215 N.J. 305 (2013) (state policy favors enforcing consensual marital agreements)
- Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Invs. Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474 (1974) (appellate reversal only when findings are manifestly unsupported)