Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Tami Corrello v. Douglas Corrello
Date: 08-06-2025
Case Number: CFm-11-0393-03
Judge: Not Available
Court: Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Mercer County
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Trenton Family Law Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Trenton Family Law Lawyer Directory
Description:
Trenton, New Jersey family law lawyers represented the parties in an alimony payment dispute.
In this matrimonial matter, the parties are before this court again post-judgment regarding the obligation of defendant Douglas Corrello to pay plaintiff Tami Corrello alimony. In this appeal, defendant challenges a March 15, 2024 order, in which a Family Part judge denied defendant's motion to terminate or modify his alimony obligation due to plaintiff's and her counsel's alleged past misrepresentations and withholding information and for sanctions. In the order, the judge also granted in part and denied in part plaintiff's cross-motion to enforce prior orders and to sanction defendant for his willful non-compliance with those orders.
* * *
Legal issue Can a prior alimony order be terminated or modified based on alleged nondisclosure of inheritance and assets?
Headnote
FAMILY LAW. ALIMONY MODIFICATION. The case involves an appeal where the defendant sought to terminate or modify his alimony obligations based on alleged misrepresentations and withholding of information by the plaintiff, specifically regarding inheritance and trust funds, and the Family Part's refusal to conduct a plenary hearing on these matters.
FAMILY LAW. FRAUD ON THE COURT. The defendant alleged fraud on the part of the plaintiff and her attorney, claiming misrepresentations related to inheritance and trust funds, but the Family Part found no evidence of such misconduct that would constitute fraud on the court.
FAMILY LAW. RES JUDICATA. The court applied the doctrine of res judicata, determining that the defendant could not relitigate issues regarding inheritance and alimony obligations that had been adjudicated and affirmed in previous court proceedings.
FAMILY LAW. LEGAL STANDARD FOR ALIMONY ADJUSTMENT. The court reaffirmed the legal principles guiding modifications of marital support obligations, emphasizing deference to Family Part judges' discretion unless findings are inconsistent with evidence or law.
FAMILY LAW. ATTORNEY'S FEES. The case addressed the appropriateness of attorney fees awarded in previous orders, which were challenged by the defendant, but ultimately upheld by the court under the deferential review standard.
Key Phrases Alimony obligation. Special needs trust. Misrepresentation allegations. Counsel fee award. Family Part judge.
In this matrimonial matter, the parties are before this court again post-judgment regarding the obligation of defendant Douglas Corrello to pay plaintiff Tami Corrello alimony. In this appeal, defendant challenges a March 15, 2024 order, in which a Family Part judge denied defendant's motion to terminate or modify his alimony obligation due to plaintiff's and her counsel's alleged past misrepresentations and withholding information and for sanctions. In the order, the judge also granted in part and denied in part plaintiff's cross-motion to enforce prior orders and to sanction defendant for his willful non-compliance with those orders.
* * *
Legal issue Can a prior alimony order be terminated or modified based on alleged nondisclosure of inheritance and assets?
Headnote
FAMILY LAW. ALIMONY MODIFICATION. The case involves an appeal where the defendant sought to terminate or modify his alimony obligations based on alleged misrepresentations and withholding of information by the plaintiff, specifically regarding inheritance and trust funds, and the Family Part's refusal to conduct a plenary hearing on these matters.
FAMILY LAW. FRAUD ON THE COURT. The defendant alleged fraud on the part of the plaintiff and her attorney, claiming misrepresentations related to inheritance and trust funds, but the Family Part found no evidence of such misconduct that would constitute fraud on the court.
FAMILY LAW. RES JUDICATA. The court applied the doctrine of res judicata, determining that the defendant could not relitigate issues regarding inheritance and alimony obligations that had been adjudicated and affirmed in previous court proceedings.
FAMILY LAW. LEGAL STANDARD FOR ALIMONY ADJUSTMENT. The court reaffirmed the legal principles guiding modifications of marital support obligations, emphasizing deference to Family Part judges' discretion unless findings are inconsistent with evidence or law.
FAMILY LAW. ATTORNEY'S FEES. The case addressed the appropriateness of attorney fees awarded in previous orders, which were challenged by the defendant, but ultimately upheld by the court under the deferential review standard.
Key Phrases Alimony obligation. Special needs trust. Misrepresentation allegations. Counsel fee award. Family Part judge.
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Tami Corrello v. Douglas Corrello?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard Tami Corrello v. Douglas Corrello?
This case was heard in Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Mercer County, NY. The presiding judge was Not Available.
Who were the attorneys in Tami Corrello v. Douglas Corrello?
Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Trenton Family Law Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Trenton Family Law Lawyer Directory.
When was Tami Corrello v. Douglas Corrello decided?
This case was decided on August 6, 2025.