Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-6057-12T3
06-09-2014
CEDARBROOK CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. BARBARA QUEEN, Defendant-Appellant.
Barbara Queen, appellant, argued the cause pro se. Joseph A. Kutschman, III, argued the cause for respondent (Cutolo Mandel, LLC, attorneys; Allyson V. Cofran, on the brief).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Before Judges Fuentes, Simonelli and Haas.
On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Morris County, Docket No. DJ-081889-11.
Barbara Queen, appellant, argued the cause pro se.
Joseph A. Kutschman, III, argued the cause for respondent (Cutolo Mandel, LLC, attorneys; Allyson V. Cofran, on the brief). PER CURIAM
On November 8, 2010, the Law Division entered judgment against defendant Barbara Queen and in favor of plaintiff Cedarbrook Condominium Association, Inc., in the amount of $15,057, in connection with common element fees incurred by defendant. Plaintiff docketed the judgment with the Clerk of the Superior Court on March 18, 2011. On October 12, 2011, the Law Division in Morris County issued a writ of execution to levy on funds held by defendant in an account at TD Bank. The Morris County Sheriff's Department executed the levy in the amount of $15,530.29, restraining the disbursement of those funds.
Plaintiff filed a motion on December 16, 2012, seeking the court's authority for the turnover of those funds. Defendant opposed the motion. The court granted plaintiff's motion for the turnover of the funds on January 16, 2013. Defendant thereafter filed a motion for hardship, claiming the court improperly ordered the release of exempt funds. The court denied defendant's motion on June 7, 2013.
On July 12, 2013, defendant filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's June 7, 2013 decision. The court denied defendant's motion for reconsideration in order dated July 26, 2013. That order stated that the denial of relief was based on "those [reasons] expressed June 7, 2013 and by Judge Hansbury January [16], 2013." Defendant failed to submit the transcripts of the hearings held on June 7, 2013, or January 16, 2013, as required by Rule 2:5-4(a). That deficiency prohibits a review of her challenge to the July 26, 2013 order, leaving us no alternative but to affirm. Cipala v. Lincoln Tech. Inst., 179 N.J. 45, 55 (2004); Soc'y Hill Condo. Ass'n. v. Soc'y Hill Assocs., 347 N.J. Super. 163, 177-78 (App. Div. 2002).
Affirmed.
I hereby certify at the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION