Case Results

Case Results

Megan's Law

Criminal Courts

Family Law

Megan's Law, CSL, and PSL Terminations, Violations, Tier-Modifications, and Tier Hearings

In the Matter of the Megan's Law Termination Petition of M.M., Passaic County Superior Court
Client retained the services of Maynard & Sumner, LLC in Morristown, New Jersey to file a petition to terminate both Megan’s Law and Community Supervision for Life (CSL). The original charge for which client was convicted no longer existed due to amendments of the law governing the crime of sexual assault by the NJ Legislature. In researching the legislative history of the law, James Maynard, Esq. determined that the offense for which client was original charge provides for eligibility under the guidelines for termination; and presented argument to the court. The assigned prosecutor declined to object to the petition. Thus, Megan’s Law and CSL termination was granted by the Court.

State v. A.L., Passaic County Superior Court, Motion to Modify Sentence (PSL)
On behalf of the A.L., attorney James H. Maynard filed a motion of modify the defendant's sentence of Parole Supervision for Life (PSL). The PSL conditions restricted the defendant from living with his children. After filing the motion, providing extensive analysis of the law and expert opinions, and vehement advocating, defense counsel obtained a sentence modification, allowing the defendant to live with children in the home.

In the Matter of J.M. Motion to Terminate Megan's Law Registration, Essex County Superior Court - Granted

In the Matter of E.B., Motion to Terminate Megan's Law Registration, Middlesex County Superior Court
On behalf of the defendant, defense counsel petitioned to terminate Megan's Law registration under N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2f. After extensive preparation and advocating, defendant was granted termination from Megan's Law registration and is no longer classified as a sex offender in the State of New Jersey.

In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of H.T-G, Avenel
The Megan's Law and CSL registrant retained Maynard & Sumner, LLC to review his Community Supervision for Life conditions and to respond to a Notice of Motion from the State of New Jersey to switch his counseling services and his general conditions regarding his conditional discharge from Avenel. The registrant did not want his CSL conditions to change. The defense petitioned and advocated that a change in the registrant's CSL conditions were unnecessary because the registrant did not pose as a threat to society. The Judge ordered that the counseling services to be moved to the State recommended facility, and declared that all other CSL conditions related to the registrant's conditional discharge were to remain intact.

Megan's Law and Parole Supervision for Life / PSL Unsupervised Visitation Petition
J.R., a registrant of Megan's Law and Parole Supervision for Life, retained Maynard & Sumner, LLC to obtain official approval from the New Jersey Parole authorities to have unsupervised visitation with his children. Mr. Maynard contacted the parole authorities and advocated on his client's behalf, successfully obtaining formal approval and written confirmation for unsupervised visitation.

State v. A.C., Passaic County Superior Court
Defendant filed petition to terminate Megan's Law registration requirements under the provisions of N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(f) and (g). Termination was granted.

State v. M.K., Sussex County Superior Court and Passaic County Superior Court
Defendant was charged with one violation of his CSL conditions in Sussex County and three violations in Passaic County. The defendant faced mandatory prison-time for each one of the violations. All charges were dismissed.

State v. M.P., Cumberland Count
Defendant was granted a termination from Megan's Law, which relieves the defendant of all obligations, requirements and disabilities pursuant to Megan's Law. The state did not oppose the motion.

State v. F.G., Supreme Court of New Jersey (originated in Morris County)
Charges: Failure to verify address under Megan's Law, 2C:7-2a
Exposure: 3 years imprisonment and $10,000 in fines; 15 year postponement of eligibility for Megan's Law termination
Outcome: Dismissal and overturned Megan's Law statute 2C:7-2a

Back to Top


Northern New Jersey Superior Court, Criminal Division

In the Pre-Charge Matter of R.H., Morris County
R.H. was being investigated by the Morris County Prosecutor's Office for the possible possession and distribution of child pornography. R.H. gave the detectives permission to search his electronic devices, and then sought the legal services of Maynard & Sumner, LLC for pre-charge representation. Mr. Maynard immediately withdrew the consent to search, and as a result, law enforcement concluded their investigation without charging our client with internet crimes.

In the Pre-Charge Matter of Juvenile, S.J., Somerset County
In this matter, James Maynard represented a juvenile who was being investigated for sexual assault, endangering the welfare of a child, and solicitation of prostitution from a minor. The matter was resolved in a stationhouse adjustment, without formal charges against the juvenile. If the juvenile was formally charged, the juvenile would have faced has the matter waived to the adult court (due to his age), with the potential conviction and sentence to Megan's Law Registration.

State v. B.M., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Possession of Cocaine, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10a(1)
Possession of Methamphetamine, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10a(1)
Possession of Adderall, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10a(1)
Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, N.J.S.A. 2C:36-2
Improper Container for Prescription Drugs, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-24
Exposure: Up to 16 years imprisonment and up to $47,000 in fines
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. M.N., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Conspiracy to Commit Burglary, 2C:5-2a(2)
Burglary, 2C:18-2
Exposure: 10 years in prison and a $30,000 fine
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. Z.S., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance with the intent to manufacture or distribute, 2C:35-5b(1)
Distribution of CDS within 1000 feet of a School Zone, 2C:35-7
Possession of more than 50 grams of Marijuana, 2C: 35-10a(3)
2 counts of Possession of Paraphernalia, 2C:36-2
Possession of a Stun Gun, 2C:39-3h
Possession of a Syringe, 2C:36-6
Exposure: 13 years in prison, $43,000 fine, and a loss of Driver's License
Outcome: Possession of CDS, 2 years of probation, and no loss of Driver's License

State v. P.E., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Theft of Services, 2C:20-9
Exposure: 5 years in prison and a $15,000 fine
Outcome: Administrative Dismissal

State v. S.S., Essex County Superior Court
Charges: 3 counts of Receiving Stolen Property, 2C:20-9
Exposure: 4.5 years in prison and a $30,000 fine
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. T.R., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Shoplifting, 2C:20-11b(2)
Shoplifting, 2C:20-11f
Exposure: 5.5 years in prison and a $16,000 fine
Outcome: Drug Court

State v. J.D., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance, 2C:35-10a
Possession of a BB Gun, 2C:39-5(c)
Underage Possession of Alcohol, 2C:33-15
Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, 2C:36-2
Exposure: 11 years in prison and a $32,000 fine
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. R.C., Essex County Superior Court
Charges: 2 counts Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance (CDS), 2C:35-10a
2 counts Distribution of a CDS, 2C:35-5a(1)
2 counts of Possession of a CDS near a School, 2C:35-7
2 counts of Distribution of CDS in a Public Place, 2C:35-7.1a
Exposure: 60 years in prison and a $660,000 fine
Outcome: Possession of CDS, 3rd degree, and Probation for 18 months

State v. K.C., Sussex County Superior Court
Charges: Theft by Unlawful Taking, 2C:20-3a
Burglary, 2C:18-2a(1)
Exposure: 5.5 years in prison and a $16,000 fine
Outcome: Trespassing, $500 fine, and 1 year probation

State v. K.A., Mercer County Superior Court
Charges: Child Neglect, 9:6-1
Exposure: 3 years in prison and a $10,000 fine
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. D.H., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Theft by Unlawful Taking, Movable property, 2C:20-3a
Theft of Property Lost, Mislaid, or Delivered by Mistake 2C:20-6
Exposure: 10 years in prison and a $30,000 fine
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. I.M., Essex Remand Court
Charges: Aggravated assault with a pocket knife, 2C:12-1b(7)
Terroristic Threats, 2C:12-3a
Exposure: 10 years in prison and a $30,000 fine
Outcome: Dismissed

State v. E.A., Essex Remand Court
Charges: Simple Assault, 2C:12-1a(1)
Exposure: 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine
Outcome: Dismissed

Pre-Charge of V.M., Morris County
Babysitter (our client) was investigated for the sexual assault of her 3-year-old charge. Our client strongly stated her innocence. The law office of Maynard & Sumner, LLC ordered a polygraph of the client who tested truthful. With the polygraph results and our fervent advocacy on behalf of our client, the investigation was closed by the Morris County Prosecutor's Office and our client was not criminal charged.

Pre-Charge of M.P., Sussex County
Our client was being investigated by the Sussex County Prosecutor's Office for the sexual assault of two underage girls. Maynard & Sumner, LLC prepared client's certification that he did not commit the alleged acts and submitted it to the investigating prosecutor, who summarily closed the investigation and did not press criminal charges against our client.

State v. S.W., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, 2C:12-1B(2)
Possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, 2C:39-4D
Exposure: 10 years imprisonment and $30,000 in fines
Outcome: Administratively dismissed

State v. M.H., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Sexual Assault (2nd degree), 2C:14-2C(1)
Exposure: 10 years in prison and up to a $150,000 fine
Outcome: Probation with a 90 day suspended sentence

State v. K.A., Mercer County Superior Court
Charges: Child Neglect, 9:6-1
Exposure: 3 years in prison and a $10,000 fine
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI)

State v. E.K., Passaic County Superior Court
Charges: Domestic violence complaint resulting in the following charges:
Criminal Mischief, 2C:17-3B
Threat to Kill, 2C:12-3B
Exposure: 5.5 years in prison and a $16,000 fine
Outcome: Dismissed

State v. C.T., Passaic County Superior Court
Charge: Shoplifting, 2C:20-11b(1)
Exposure: 6 months in jail and $1,000 fine plus restitution
Outcome: Dismissed

State v. P.V., Passaic County Superior Court
Charges: Criminal Attempt, 2C:5-1
Forgery, 2C:21-1
Conspiracy, 2C:5-2
Exposure: 10 years in prison and $30,000 in fines
Outcome: PTI for one year

State v. L.G., Essex County Remand Court
Charges: Possession of CDS, 2C:35-10a(1)
Tampering with Evidence, 2C:28-6(1)
Endangering the Welfare of a Child, 2C:24-4A
Exposure: 18 years imprisonment and a $175,000 fine
Outcome: Disorderly conduct, probation 1 year

State v. K.O., Essex County Superior Court
Charges: Child Endangerment, 2C:24-4a
Exposure: 10 years in prison and $150,000 in fines
Outcome: PTI for six months

State v. O.P., Morris County
Charge: Aggravated Assault, 2C:12-1b(2)
Exposure: 5 years imprisonment and $15,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissal

State v. D.W., Essex County
Charges: Terroristic threats, 2C: 12-3a
Contempt (Violation of Restraining Order), 2C: 29-9
Exposure: 6.5 years imprisonment and $25,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissal

State v. K.F., Union County
Charge: Aggravated assault, 2C:12- 1b(1)
Exposure: 10 years imprisonment and $150,000 in fines
Outcome: Pled to a disorderly persons offense receiving one year of probation and one year of anger-management counseling

State v. A.J., Morris County
Charges: Aggravated assault, 2C:12- 1b(1)
Exposure: 10 years imprisonment and $150,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissal

State v. J.T., Union County
Charges: Aggravated assault, 2C:12-1(b)
Possession of a weapon, 2C:39-5d
Criminal mischief, 2C:17-3a(1)
Exposure: 16.5 years imprisonment and a $175,000 fine.
Outcome: Dismissal

State v. J.M., Morris County
Charges: Prescription fraud, 2C:35-13
Possession of CDS, 2C:21-1a(2)
Forgery, 2C:35-10a
Exposure: 8 years imprisonment and $75,000 in fines
Outcome: 2 years in PTI (Pre-trial Intervention)

State v. D.P., Essex County
Charges: Conspiracy, 2C:5-2
Aggravated Arson, 2C:17-1a(2)
Insurance Fraud, 2C:21-4.6(b)
Criminal attempt, 2C:5-1
Exposure: 40 years imprisonment and $600,000 in fines
Outcome: 3 years on probation and restitution

State v. F.P., Essex County
Charges: Endangering the welfare of a child (2 counts), 2C:24-4a
Sex assault, 2C:14-2
Exposure: 30 years imprisonment and $450,000 fine; Megan's Law and Parole Supervision for Life / PSL
Outcome: 3 years suspended sentence

State v. A.P., Morris County
Charges: Possession of CDS (under 50 g.), 2C:35-10A(4)
Possession of drug paraphernalia, 2C:36-2
Exposure: 2 years imprisonment and $11,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissal

State v. N.M., Sussex County
Charges: Lewdness, 2C:14-4
Exposure: 18 months imprisonment and $1,000 in fines
Outcome: Municipal ordinance

State v. N.M., Hudson County
Charges: Possession of CDS, 2C:35-10(A)
Tampering with evidence, 2C:28-6(1)
Exposure: 4.5 years imprisonment and $6,000 in fines
Outcome: Conditional discharge

State v. M.T., Sussex County Superior Court
Charges: Possession of a firearm to use against another person, 2C:39-4a
Harassment with the purpose to engage in alarming conduct, 2c:33-4c
Exposure: 10 year imprisonment and $150,000 in fines
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention (PTI), granted as an exception

State v. P.V., Middlesex County Superior Court
Charge: Violation of CSL, Failure to notify parole officer of arrest, 2C:43-6.4d
Exposure: Mandatory 1 year imprisonment and $10,000 in fines
Outcome: 45 days in jail with probation

State v. P.W., Morris County
Charge: Aggravated Assault, 2C:12-1b(1)
Exposure: 10 years imprisonment and $150,000 in fines
Outcome: Pled guilty to Simple Assault (a disorderly persons offense) and received 1 year probation

State v. A.M.S., Passaic County
Charges: Vehicular homicide, 2C:11-5a
Assault by auto, two counts, 2C:12-1c
Underage DWI, 39:4-50
Exposure: 20 years imprisonment
Lifetime suspension of driver's license
$180,000 in fines
Outcome: Pretrial Intervention / PTI

State v. H.M., Morris County
Charges: Robbery, 2C:15-1
Aggravated assault, 2C:12-1
Conspiracy to commit robbery, 2C:5-2
Tampering with a witness, 2C:28-5
VOP (Violation of Probation)
Exposure: 30 years imprisonment and $330,000 in fines
Outcome: 5 years probation

State v. N.K., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Theft by deception, 2C:20-4a
Insurance Fraud, 2C:21-4.6a
Impersonation, 2C:21-17a(1)
Theft of Services, 2C:20-8a
Exposure: $60,000 in fines and 20 years imprisonment
Outcome: Pre-Trail Intervention / PTI

State v. A.S., Essex County Remand Court
Charge: Simple Assault, 2C:12-34
Exposure: 6 months jail-time and $1,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissed

State v. C.B., Morris County Superior Court (remanded to Morris Twp. Municipal Court)
Charges: Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, 2C: 36-2
Possession of CDS - Marijuana, 2C:35-10b
Possession of CDS - Ambien, 2C:35-10.5e(2)
DWI (2nd offense), 39:4-50
Failure to maintain lane, 39:4-88b
Failure to signal, 39:4-126
CDS in motor vehicle,39:4-49.1
Touring privileges, 39:3-17
Careless driving, 39:4-97
Exposure: 3 years imprisonment
$14,500 in fines and surcharges
4 years loss of driving privileges
15 MVC points
48 hours in IDRC
Community service for 30 days
Mandatory installation of an ignition interlock device for 3 years post-restoration of driver's license
Outcome: Pled guilty to a 1st offense DWI, and all other charges dismissed, including third degree felony drug charges
Loss one year NJ driving privileges
Minimal fines, no community service, no jail-time

State v. D.B., Passaic County Superior Court
Extradition Hearing

The defendant was arrested and detained based on a violation of his probation in Florida. Florida requested an extradition from his home state of New Jersey. The extradition was denied and the New Jersey court ordered for the immediate release of the defendant.

State v. Q.R., Middlesex County Superior Court
Bail Motion

The defendant was detained for a second degree aggravated assault with bodily injury. The bail was set at $150,000 without a 10% option. The defense successfully argued for a reduction in bail for $50,000 with a 10% option.

State v. J.C., Morris County Juvenile Court
Charges: Possession of CDS, 2C:35-10a(4), 2 Counts
Manufacturing, 2C:35-5b(12), 2 counts
Possession of within school zone, 2C:35-7
Possession of Paraphernalia, 2C:36-2
Exposure: 9.5 years imprisonment and $318,000 in fines
Outcome: Delayed disposition for 1 year, then charges dismissed

State v. J.S., Morris County Supreme Court
Charges: Intent to distribute cocaine, 2C:35-5b(2)
Intent to distribute within 500 ft. of park, 2C:35-7.1
Possession of CDS - cocaine, 2C:35-10A
Possession of CDS - marijuana, 2C:35-10A
Obstruction of official function, 2C:29-1B
Exposure:27 years imprisonment and $345,000 in fines
Outcome: No prison-time, no fines, 5 years probation

State v. A.F., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: Aggravated assault, 2C:12-1b(1)
Possession of a weapon, 2C:39-5
Exposure: 20 years imprisonment and $300,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissed

State v. Y.A., Essex County and Hudson County Superior Courts

Essex County Charges: Violation of Probation
Threat to kill, 2C: 12-3b
Obstruction, 2C:29-2b
Exposure: 20 years imprisonment
$60,000 in fines
Outcome: Dismissed

Hudson County Charges: Possession of CDS (under 50 g.), 2C:35-10a(4)
Exposure: 18 months imprisonment
$1,000 fine
Outcome: Dismissed

State v. R.F., Essex County Superior Court
Charges: DWI, 39:4-50
Open container, 39:4-51(b)
Possession of handgun 2C:39-3b
Possession of ammunition 2C:39-3f(1)
Exposure: 6.5 years imprisonment
$25,000 in fines
Outcome: One year on PTI (Pre-Trial Intervention)

State v. E.H., Morris County Superior Court
Charges: DWI, 39:4-50
Exposure: 1 year driver's license suspension
$400 fines
48 hours at Intoxicated Driver Resource Center
30 days imprisonment
Outcomes: Dismissed

Back to Top


Family Law

P.P. v. H.B., Motion to Dissolve Final Restraining Order (FRO), Essex County Superior Court
The Defendant retained the law office of Maynard & Sumner, LLC of Morris County, NJ prepare and argue a motion to dissolve his FRO issued in 2001. Matthew Sumner, Esq. carefully prepared said petition, outlining the factors that the court scrutinizes to determine whether the order is still relevant and whether it is the public interest dissolve said order, and submitted to the court. The Order was met with fierce opposition by Plaintiff, who stated that she still needed the protection from the FRO. The Court determined that Plaintiff’s fear was irrational, and granted Defendant’s motion, thus ordering dissolution of FRO.

B.A. v. J.C., Motion to Modify Child Support, Morris County Superior Court
The Defendant retained the legal services of Maynard & Sumner, LLC to defend against the Motion to Modify Child Support, in which Plaintiff sought to decrease his weekly child support obligation. Plaintiff argued that Defendant was under employed, and therefore, income should be imputed to her to reflect her true earning capability. Matthew Sumner, Esq. carefully analyzed Plaintiff’s requests and finances, discovering that Plaintiff failed to disclose his overtime income to the Court. In conclusion, the Court increased Plaintiff’s child support obligation to our client, the Defendant.

B.A. v. J.C., Motion for Reconsideration of Child Support Modification, Morris County Superior Court
A motion for reconsideration is when one party requests the Court to reconsider its decision on a recent order. It is different from an appeal. Maynard & Sumner, LLC represented the Defendant. In this case, Plaintiff requested the Court to reconsider the Order increasing child support due to Defendant on the basis that the Court erroneously calculated child care expenses for the Defendant when the Defendant did not have child care costs. Matthew Sumner proved to the Court that Defendant did, in fact, have child care expenses, and that her income was lower than the Plaintiff argued. As a result, the Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration and increased Plaintiff’s child support obligation; ultimately benefiting our client.

DYFS v. D.C., Middlesex County Office, Office of Administrative Law
Matthew Sumner, Esq. of Maynard & Sumner, LLC represented Defendant, D.C. in his appeal of the substantiation of child abuse post-investigation. In appealing a DYFS substantiation of child abuse, our law office prepares a thorough petition, articulating the facts of the case and the law, outlining our legal points and contesting the finding. As a result of our carefully prepared petition, the Court administratively granted appeal and dismissed DYFS’s substantiation of child abuse.

DCPP Investigation of F.N., Passaic County

DCPP, f/k/a as DYFS, began an investigation of a mother, F.N., on an allegation of child abuse. F.N. immediately sought the legal counsel of Maynard & Sumner, LLC to handle her matter and manage communication with the caseworker. Matthew Sumner, Esq. managed the investigation by protecting our client’s rights and her children from intrusive questioning. Based on Mr. Sumner’s intervention with the investigation, the caseworker determined that she would close the investigation; however, she wished to conduct one last inspection of the client’s home. Mr. Sumner was in attendance for the final home inspection, concluding the investigation and protecting our client from unnecessary charges.

C.P. v. L.R.D., Motion for Child Custody, Essex County Superior Court
The law firm of Maynard & Sumner, LLC represented the Plaintiff who was served with a Motion for Child Custody by Defendant. Plaintiff sought our services to have motion dismissed as she was no longer a resident of New Jersey, and that if the Defendant wished to sue for child custody, the matter must be presented to the state in which she and the child resided. Matthew Sumner, Esq. submitted a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. The Judge requested each party submits a brief, articulating the basis their respective positions. Mr. Sumner advocated for his client’s position in the brief, arguing that the New Jersey courts no longer had jurisdiction of the child as the child has not resided in the state in over three years. Current interstate child custody law states that a state may lose jurisdiction over a child if the child resides outside of the state for more than 6 months. As Defendant gave permission to Plaintiff to remove the child from NJ three years ago, and the child has not resided in NJ since, the Judge granted our client’s cross-motion to dismiss Plaintiff's motion on the basis that New Jersey lacked jurisdiction.

L.M. v. J.R., Sussex Superior Court
Following a Temporary Restraining Order / TRO hearing, the Court ruled that the Defendant (represented by Maynard & Sumner, LLC) did not commit an act of domestic violence. The Plaintiff accused the Defendant of making a threat to kill the Plaintiff to a third party. The Plaintiff could not prove that the Defendant intended the third party to convey the threat to the Plaintiff. Temporary restraining order dismissed.

DCF(DYFS) v. N.S., Warren County Superior Court
This is an Administrative Appeal of a substantiation of child abuse and neglect for inadequate shelter. Although the Division of Children and Families (also known as DYFS) established that the children had been living in a house under renovation with no appliances, broken windows and unfinished floors, DYFS changed their substantiation to unfounded after Matthew Sumner made a Motion to Dismiss on the basis that DYFS failed to show the children had been neglected or abused.
Mr. Sumner argued that substandard, dirty and inadequate sleeping conditions are unfortunate incidents of poverty, but they do not, by themselves, establish child abuse or neglect. Mr. Sumner cited a previous decision that stated "Adoption of such facts as a basis for a finding of child neglect or abuse might result in mass transfers of children from ghettos and disadvantaged areas into more luxurious living accommodations but with resultant destruction of the natural parental bond [which] clearly was not the design of the statute nor the intent of the Legislature." Doe v. G.D., 146 N.J. Super . 419, 431 (App.Div.1976), aff'd, 74 N.J. 196 (1977)

E.T. v. M.M.,Morris County Superior Court
Custody and Child Removal: The father took the parties' 3 children from Texas to reside with his father and step-mother in New Jersey without the children's mother's knowledge, consent or Court Order. Three months later, the mother eventually raised enough money to come to New Jersey and fight her ex-boyfriend for custody. She retained Maynard & Sumner, LLC to represent her in the custody dispute.
After a hearing wherein both parties testified, the Court awarded physical custody of the children to the mother after Mr. Sumner argued that even though Texas may not have had a similar law, by the father filing for custody and submitting to the jurisdiction of New Jersey, it was against New Jersey State Law to remove children without the other's parent's consent or Court Order. Mr. Sumner also urged, and the Court found that it was in the children's best interest to reside with his client and her grandfather in New Jersey (the mother being from New Jersey), rather than their father, who was from Texas.

DYFS Investigation, K., P.-W., Bergen County Superior Court, Family Division
In the matter of P.-W., the defendant was under investigation by the Division of Youth and Family Services for child neglect of her newborn child. The defendant has been substantiated for child neglect in the past. The DYFS regulation is that if an offender is substantiated with regard to one child, it is presumed that siblings and/or child yet to be born are also at risk of harm.
When a new child was born, DYFS sought an Order to Investigate, requiring both mother and father to undergo evaluations and treatment. The Court ruled that since the parties were cooperative and there was no evidence of abuse or neglect, they should not be subject to further investigation and therefore dismissed the Order to Show Cause to Investigate.

DYFS v. K.E., et. als., Essex County Superior Court
Court requires minor to testify in court in DYFS fact-finding hearing subject to cross-examination.
Usually, statements made by minors, alleging abuse and neglect against parents, are admissible through their statements to DYFS workers. However in this case, Matthew Sumner of Maynard and Sumner, LLC (and his co-counsel) convinced the Court because of the age and maturity of the minor, along with the minor's varying accounts of the alleged events of abuse and neglect, the Court should require the minor to testify in court in the DYFS fact-finding hearing. The Court ruled that, despite the recommendation of the DYFS and Law Guardian's expert who indicated that the minor's fear of retribution was real, the minor's rights would be protected by testifying in a closed court room, outside the presence of the minor's parents.
As a result of the cross-examination of the minor by Mr. Sumner (and co-counsel), the Court found that the minor's version of events were incredible and found that the allegations of abuse and neglect against both parents were unsubstantiated.

R.M. v. M.M., Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Outcome: Motion for a reduction in the amount of child support payable
Appellate Division affirmed decision in favor of our client the plaintiff.
Defendant M.M. appealed decision made by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Morris County to deny motion for a reduction in the amount of child support payable to the plaintiff R.M. (our client). Defendant M.M. claimed she was unable to continue paying the decided amount of child support due to a loss of employment. The courts refused her motion because her assets could easily cover her mandated child support amount, and she was highly capable of finding employment based on her high-level qualifications.

DYFS v. K.M. & R. L., Warren County Superior Court
After a Hearing, Court dismisses DYFS Complaint to Investigate where Defendant shows "anonymous caller" had ulterior motive in calling DYFS and is able to convince Court to accept private diagnostic screenings (refuting allegations of drug and alcohol use), rather than undergo examination by DYFS medical providers.

DYFS v. N.M. & M.M., Sussex County Superior Court
After a Hearing before the Administrative Law Judge, the Court reverses a DYFS finding of child neglect against father for consuming alcoholic beverages while caring for infant. Despite DYFS regulation that alcohol consumption by caretaker presumes that child is placed in a position of potential harm, testimony indicated that child was asleep during incident, police did not charge father with any alcohol related offense or indicate that his alcohol consumption prevented him from rendering proper care.

S H v. R H, Morris County Superior Court
DIVORCE Alimony/Removal of Child from State. Wife found entitled to alimony even though husband previously terminated from employment. Wife entitled to remove child from state when husband arrested on pornography charges.

M W v. T W, Sussex County Superior Court
DIVORCE Forensic Accounting. Wife given marital estate after forensic accountant is able to prove that husband's solely owned business had been misreporting income and expenses.

T.M. v. J.L., Morris County Superior Court
POST-DIVORCE: Custody Litigation Mother wins sole custody of children after court finds that natural father abuses spirit of joint-custody agreement following evidentiary hearing.

P.G. v. G., Union County Superior Court
POST-DIVORCE: Child Support/College/Emancipation. Father no longer required to pay child support once its revealed that child cutting college classes and mother concealing child's true status.

K.S. v. L.D., Morris County Superior Court
FAMILY LAW: Custody/Litigation/Removal of Child from State. Father wins custody of two children and the right to remove children to another state following Bests Interests Hearing.

Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) v. S.R., Warren County Superior Court
FAMILY LAW: DYFS Litigation. Court returns children to natural mother from foster care after court finds that police officers and DYFS caseworker lied about her alleged child abuse.

Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) v. L.W. Hudson County Superior Court
FAMILY LAW: DYFS Litigation. Child returned to mother from foster care despite mother having been found guilty of assaulting child.

M.B. v. M.T., Union County Superior Court
FAMILY LAW: Domestic Violence. Successfully prosecuted and obtained Final Restraining Order on behalf of female victim threatened by boyfriend.

H.B., Jr. v. S.M., Morris County Superior Court
FAMILY LAW: Domestic Violence. Successfully defended client accused of harassing his ex-girlfriend thus avoiding imposition of restraining order.