Get Divorced and move on plus Domestic Violence cases

Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. Edison, NJ 732-572-0500 To schedule a confidential consultation, call us. To schedule a confidential consultation, email us at VercammenAppointments@NJlaws.com 2053 Woodbridge Ave., Edison, NJ 08817

Showing posts with label 2C:25-32. Alleged contempt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2C:25-32. Alleged contempt. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

2C:25-32. Alleged contempt, complainant's procedure

2C:25-32.    Alleged contempt, complainant's procedure 
16.  Where a person alleges that a defendant has committed contempt of an order entered pursuant to the provisions of P.L.1981, c.426 (C.2C:25-1 et seq.) or P.L.1991, c.261, but where a law enforcement officer has found that there is not probable cause sufficient to arrest the defendant, the law enforcement officer shall advise the complainant of the procedure for completing and signing a criminal complaint alleging a violation of N.J.S.2C:29-9.  During regular court hours, the assistance of the clerk of the Family Part of the Chancery Division of the Superior Court shall be made available to such complainants.  Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the court from granting any other emergency relief it deems necessary.
Posted by Vercammen Law at 5:39 PM No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: 2C:25-32. Alleged contempt, complainant's procedure
Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Followers

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2024 (6)
    • ▼  May (2)
      • Updated Domestic Violence Brochures
      • In DV, plaintiff here did not need to prove "cour...
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2023 (24)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2022 (7)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ►  July (1)
  • ►  2021 (21)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (7)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (4)
  • ►  2020 (10)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2019 (19)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2018 (13)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2017 (22)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2016 (23)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2015 (119)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (35)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  February (55)
    • ►  January (14)
  • ►  2014 (39)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (9)
    • ►  May (12)
    • ►  April (6)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2013 (4)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2012 (30)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  July (22)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2011 (101)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (10)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ►  June (7)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (14)
    • ►  February (53)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2010 (21)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  July (11)
    • ►  June (4)

About Me

Vercammen Law
View my complete profile
Simple theme. Powered by Blogger.