TRENTON — When state lawmakers last year tried to get strict about palimony agreements, they required the arrangements be put in writing so they could be recognized by a court. The new law was supposed to prevent rightful heirs being cheated out of their inheritances, but it didn’t take into account those who already were in court battling over...
Kimberly Chatlos, left, and her husband, Calvin Chatlos, testified before the General Assembly's Judiciary Committee in December 2009 about a bill to close a loop hole in the state's palimony laws.TRENTON — When state lawmakers last year tried to get strict about palimony agreements, they required the arrangements be put in writing so they could be recognized by a court.
The new law was supposed to prevent rightful heirs being cheated out of their inheritances, but it didn’t take into account those who already were in court battling over those issues.
In a narrowly written decision today, an appellate panel said the requirement for written palimony agreements does not apply to those who filed complaints before the law was adopted.
"We’re very happy about the decision,’’ said Red Bank attorney Megan Murray. "Finally, a small victory for my client."
Her client is Barbara Botis, a 72-year-old Englishtown woman who says she is entitled to the estate of her former longtime companion, Gary Kudrick, because he promised to take care of her financially after his death.
Kudrick’s daughter, Kimberly Chatlos of Old Bridge, says Botis isn’t entitled to anything. She says her father and Botis broke up at least eight months before her father’s 2008 death and he never planned to leave her his estate, once valued at $1 million and including two homes and two boats. She says her father’s two wills left everything to her and her children, and nothing to Botis, whom he dated for more than 32 years.
Days after Kudrick’s death from cancer at age 70, Botis, who had since been locked out of the Holmdel home she shared with Kudrick, filed a complaint in state Superior Court in Monmouth County. While the case was pending, the state passed the law saying agreements about palimony — a payment similar to alimony, but applying to couples who are not married — must be in writing.
The appeals court agreed with Botis’ claim that the new law did not apply to her case. It did not address what happens to couples who already broke up but have not yet filed complaints.
"Prior to this amendment and at the time of their agreement, case law supported a mutual expectation that their agreement was enforceable without regard to a writing executed after consultation with an attorney," the court wrote.
The court said the case can proceed in Superior Court. However, a May 6 Superior Court hearing on an attempt by Chatlos to get the case thrown out on a separate issue will proceed. Chatlos’ attorney, Georgia Fraser of Flemington, said no decision has been made on a possible appeal to the state Supreme Court.
In the meantime, the legal bills continue to mount. Botis is living in a mobile home park with her mother, and the estate is selling a Waretown house in order to pay the estate expenses, including lawyer fees.
Fraser said Chatlos is "in an untenable situation to try to keep what she has. … The real tragedy here is this man’s last wishes are not going to be honored because all his money is going to be spent on litigation."