Ongoing Divorce Issue: Why 'No Fault' Should Mean 'No Trial'

, New York Law Journal


Lee Rosenberg, a partner at Saltzman Chetkof & Rosenberg, writes: Despite the clearly expressed legislative intent, there are several decisions which have found that legislative omission in the statutory enactment creates the need for a trial when one party objects to the proponent's sworn assertion that the marriage was irretrievably broken. Fortunately, some very well-reasoned lower court decisions have also been issued which will hopefully guide others along the right path.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202557125592

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.