As frequent readers of this blog may know, earlier this year, we
were the winning attorneys in the landmark palimony case, Maeker v. Ross. My post on that case on
this blog was entitled
Is Palimomy In New Jersey Over As We Knew It? Since the
Supreme Court recently granted Certification, we will see what they
ultimately have to say about this issue some time next year.
In the mean time, a lot has been written about the unreported
trial court opinion in the case of Joiner v. Orman recently decided by
Judge Rosenberg in Essex County, suggesting that palimony is alive
and well, especially the argument that partial performance is a bar
to the statute of frauds (the statute requiring palimony agreements
to be in writing was included as an amendment to the Statute of
Frauds). While the palimony opponents could be worried about
this decision, it is not precedential (i.e. it doesn't have to
be followed) both because it is a trial court opinion and
unreported. More
