D'Onofrio v. D'Onofrio, 365 A.2d 716 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1976). · Go Syfert
Search
D'Onofrio v. D'Onofrio, 365 A.2d 716 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1976). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
167 citation events (22 in the last 25 years) across 26 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Nighswander v. Sudick, 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 1034 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2000)
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1976 2001 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
144 N.J. Super. at 428 Shifting burden of proof after prima facie showing1 citing case
  • Nighswander v. Sudick, 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 1034 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2000).unpublished
    Once the custodial parent has made such a prima facie showing, the burden shifts to the noncustodial parent to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the relocation would not be in the best interests of the child." Id. at 428.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
DOMINICK A. D'ONOFRIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
PHYLLIS D'ONOFRIO, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division.
Oct 14, 1976.
Published opinion
365 A.2d 716
1976 N.J. Super. LEXIS 682
Judges Lora, Crane and Michels.
Published

Before Judges LORA, CRANE and MICHELS.

[*353] Mr. LeRoy D. Safro argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. George D. Rosenthal argued the cause for respondent (Messrs. Rosenthal and Rubinowitz, attorneys; Mr. Jerome L. Rubinowitz on the brief).

PER CURIAM.

We affirm substantially for the reasons expressed in the written opinion of Judge Pressler, 144 N.J. Super. 200 (Ch. Div. 1976).