From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re T.H.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION
Jun 12, 2012
DOCKET NO. A-5957-10T4 (App. Div. Jun. 12, 2012)

Opinion

DOCKET NO. A-5957-10T4

06-12-2012

KINSHIP MATTER OF T.H.

K.B., appellant pro se. Respondent T.D. has not filed a brief.


RECORD IMPOUNDED


NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Before Judges Grall and Skillman.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Mercer County, Docket No. FL-11-5-10.

K.B., appellant pro se.

Respondent T.D. has not filed a brief. PER CURIAM

In September 2009, the Family Part entered a judgment placing T.H. under the Kinship Legal Guardianship of T.D. N.J.S.A. 3B:12A-1 to -7. Prior to the entry of judgment, T.H.'s mother had given temporary custody of the child to T.D. and the man with whom she was living at the time, K.B. When the judgment of Kinship Legal Guardianship was entered, T.D. and K.B. were still living together. They later separated, and in March 2011 K.B. moved to vacate the judgment.

In support of his initial application to vacate, K.B. argued that he had no notice or knowledge of the Kinship Legal Guardianship proceeding. On April 8, 2011, the judge heard the motion and took testimony from K.B. and T.D. The judge credited T.D.'s assertion that K.B. was fully aware of the Kinship Legal Guardianship proceeding and, in fact, was in the hallway of the courthouse during that proceeding. Consequently, the judge denied K.B.'s motion to vacate the judgment. K.B. then filed an untimely motion for reconsideration, which the judge also denied.

K.B. appeals. He asserts that the court's decision was not supported by sufficient credible evidence in the record, is unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious and entered in violation of his right to procedural due process. We have considered the arguments in light of the record and determined that they lack sufficient merit to warrant further discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). The judge's determination is based on findings of fact that are adequately supported by evidence, R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(A), and we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the judge in his oral decisions of April 8 and June 24, 2011.

Affirmed.

I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.

CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION


Summaries of

In re T.H.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION
Jun 12, 2012
DOCKET NO. A-5957-10T4 (App. Div. Jun. 12, 2012)
Case details for

In re T.H.

Case Details

Full title:KINSHIP MATTER OF T.H.

Court:SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION

Date published: Jun 12, 2012

Citations

DOCKET NO. A-5957-10T4 (App. Div. Jun. 12, 2012)