STENEKEN v. STENEKEN


873 A.2d 501 (2005)

183 N.J. 290

Marilyn A. STENEKEN, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Gary L. STENEKEN, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided May 18, 2005.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Todd M. Sahner, Roseland, argued the cause for appellant (Marcus, Brody, Kessler, Sahner & Weinstein, attorneys).

Bonnie C. Frost, Denville, argued the cause for respondent (Einhorn, Harris, Ascher, Barbarito, Frost & Ironson, attorneys).


Justice RIVERA-SOTO, delivered the opinion of the Court.

This appeal requires that we address whether, in setting an award of alimony and in establishing equitable distribution in respect of a closely-held corporation, the trial court must use the same income determination. As differently posed by defendant, the question is whether it is impermissible "double counting" to use actual income for alimony purposes but a lower "normalized" income amount when valuing a...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases