nine factors (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

nine factors in New Jersey

7 New Jersey opinions name it 1 courts 2017–2024 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Mani v. Manigreen
nj · 2005 · cited in 4 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2017–2024
2 sentences

2019Rule 5:3-5(c) permits an award of fees upon consideration of the following nine factors: (1) the financial circumstances of the parties; (2) the ability of the parties to pay their own fees or to A-4687-16T3 21 contribute to the fees of the other party; (3) the reasonableness and good faith of the positions advanced by the parties both during and prior to trial; (4) the extent of the fees incurred by both parties; (5) any fees previously awarded; (6) the amount of fees previously paid to counsel by each party; (7) the results obtained; (8) the degree to which fees were incurred to enforce exis

2019An award of counsel fees in a Family Part action is a discretionary determination, Williams, 59 N.J. at 233 , reached after consideration of the following nine factors: (1) the financial circumstances of the parties; (2) the ability of the parties to pay their own fees or to contribute to the fees of the other party; (3) the reasonableness and good faith of the positions advanced by the parties both during and prior to trial; (4) the extent of the fees incurred by both parties; (5) any fees previously awarded; (6) the amount of fees previously paid to counsel by each party; (7) the results obt

34
Williams v. Williamsgreen
nj · 1971 · cited in 3 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2017–2024
2 sentences

2019An award of counsel fees in a Family Part action is a discretionary determination, Williams, 59 N.J. at 233 , reached after consideration of the following nine factors: (1) the financial circumstances of the parties; (2) the ability of the parties to pay their own fees or to contribute to the fees of the other party; (3) the reasonableness and good faith of the positions advanced by the parties both during and prior to trial; (4) the extent of the fees incurred by both parties; (5) any fees previously awarded; (6) the amount of fees previously paid to counsel by each party; (7) the results obt

2017In determining whether a party is entitled to counsel fees under Rule 5:3-5(c), the Family Part must consider the following nine factors: 20 A-0268-15T1 (1) the financial circumstances of the parties; (2) the ability of the parties to pay their own fees or to contribute to the fees of the other party; (3) the reasonableness and good faith of the positions advanced by the parties both during and prior to trial; (4) the extent of the fees incurred by both parties; (5) any fees previously awarded; (6) the amount of fees previously paid to counsel by each party; (7) the results obtained; (8) the d

23
Reese v. Weisgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 2013 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2017–2019
2 sentences

2019However, not every factor must be considered, Reese v. Weis, 430 N.J.

2017In determining whether a party is entitled to counsel fees under Rule 5:3-5(c), the Family Part must consider the following nine factors: 20 A-0268-15T1 (1) the financial circumstances of the parties; (2) the ability of the parties to pay their own fees or to contribute to the fees of the other party; (3) the reasonableness and good faith of the positions advanced by the parties both during and prior to trial; (4) the extent of the fees incurred by both parties; (5) any fees previously awarded; (6) the amount of fees previously paid to counsel by each party; (7) the results obtained; (8) the d

22
Jev v. Kvgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 2012 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024In Mani v. Mani, 183 N.J. 70, 94-95 (2005), the Supreme Court summarized the attorney fee inquiry as follows: In a nutshell, in awarding counsel fees, the court must consider whether the party requesting the fees is in financial need; whether the party against whom the fees are sought has the ability to pay; the good or bad faith of either party in pursuing or defending the action; the nature and extent of the services rendered; and the reasonableness of the fees. [Ibid. (citing Williams v. Williams, 59 N.J. 229, 233 (1971)).] A-3143-20 28 "In fashioning an attorney fee award, the judge must d

11
NANCY G. SLUTSKY VS. KENNETH J. SLUTSKY (FM-14-1535-08, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)(CONSOLIDATED)green
njsuperctappdiv · 2017 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020Defendant argues the judge "focused on two of the nine factors enumerated in Rule 5:3-5(c)," and "ignor[ed] the fact that [p]laintiff filed the initial unnecessary application, has a far greater ability to fund the litigation," and "brought [the application] in bad faith." Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23, when a party makes "an application for . . . counsel fees, the court shall determine the appropriate award for counsel fees, if any, . . . consider[ing] the factors set forth in [Rule 5:3-5], the financial circumstances of the parties, and the good or bad faith of either party." N.J.S.A. 2A:34-

2020Super. 332, 366 (App. Div. 2018) (quoting R. 5:3-5(c)).] "The assessment of counsel fees is discretionary" and we "will disturb a trial court's determination on counsel fees only on the 'rarest occasion,' and then only because of clear abuse of discretion." Id. at 365 (quoting Strahan v. Strahan, 402 N.J.

11
Strahan v. Strahangreen
njsuperctappdiv · 2008 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Super. 332, 366 (App. Div. 2018) (quoting R. 5:3-5(c)).] "The assessment of counsel fees is discretionary" and we "will disturb a trial court's determination on counsel fees only on the 'rarest occasion,' and then only because of clear abuse of discretion." Id. at 365 (quoting Strahan v. Strahan, 402 N.J.

11
Metromedia, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxationgreen
nj · 1984 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019There is insufficient evidence in the two administrators' written decision that they considered any of the nine factors other than the "[f]ield account of the present offense," N.J.A.C. 10A:9-4.5(a)(1).4 "Field account" is not defined, but in connection with that factor, the administrators focused on the circumstances 3 They also said that the decision must be based on "internal management procedures as well as any potential safety and security risks." We question whether reliance on non-promulgated internal procedures would run afoul of the recent order in Smith, slip op. at 11-12, as well as

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Randazzo v. Randazzo green
nj · 2005
1 sentence

2019Ibid.

12019–2019
Jenkins v. Fauver green
nj · 1987
1 sentence

2019There is insufficient evidence in the two administrators' written decision that they considered any of the nine factors other than the "[f]ield account of the present offense," N.J.A.C. 10A:9-4.5(a)(1).4 "Field account" is not defined, but in connection with that factor, the administrators focused on the circumstances 3 They also said that the decision must be based on "internal management procedures as well as any potential safety and security risks." We question whether reliance on non-promulgated internal procedures would run afoul of the recent order in Smith, slip op. at 11-12, as well as

12019–2019

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2A:34-23 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

OH 61 (1998–2026) GA 27 (1977–2023) WA 25 (1991–2025) TX 20 (1969–2021) IL 14 (2014–2025) TN 13 (2001–2022) VT 9 (2002–2024) NM 8 (2001–2023) KS 8 (2002–2022) MD 8 (1982–1992) AK 8 (2002–2026) NJ 7 (2017–2024) MS 6 (1995–2018) CO 6 (1987–2020) LA 6 (1998–2021) IN 6 (2001–2020) VA 5 (1983–2005) CA 4 (2005–2025) NY 4 (1983–2024) KY 4 (2001–2023) PA 4 (2014–2020) NC 4 (2019–2021) MI 3 (2019–2025) FL 3 (2004–2017) OR 2 (2025–2025) DE 2 (2025–2025) HI 2 (2008–2013) AR 2 (1984–2017)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check