In a recently decided appellate division case, the panel reaffirmed the current law in NJ which holds that there is a presumption in favor of the victim of domestic violence having temporary custody of the children. Also, it appears, for reasons that are not fully explained in the brief summary, that the victim was removed from the home. The appellate court found this to be in error and reversed that portion of the restraining order.
FAMILY LAW — DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
20-2-8024 J.D. v. M.A.D., App. Div. (Accurso, J.S.C., temporarily assigned) (18 pp.) We review a wife’s appeal of that portion of a domestic-violence final restraining order entered against her husband, granting him exclusive possession of their marital home and temporary custody of their two children. Because that order denied the victim of domestic violence temporary custody of her children, contrary to the statutory presumption contained in N.J.S.A. 2C:25-29b(11), and restrained her from her home without statutory authorization, we reverse.
