2A:4-30.110 Grounds for contesting validity, enforcement, vacating registration.
46. a. A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one or more of the following defenses:
(1)the issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the contesting party;
(2)the order was obtained by fraud;
(3)the order has been vacated, suspended, or modified by a later order;
(4)the issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal;
(5)there is a defense under the law of this State to the remedy sought;
(6)full or partial payment has been made; or
(7)the statute of limitation under section 43 of this act precludes enforcement of some or all of the arrearages.
b.If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial defense under subsection a. of this section, a tribunal may stay enforcement of the registered order, continue the proceeding to permit production of additional relevant evidence, or issue other appropriate orders. An uncontested portion of the registered order may be enforced by all remedies available under the law of this State.
c.If the contesting party does not establish a defense under subsection a. of this section to the validity or enforcement of the order, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.
L.1998,c.2,s.46.
Section: Previous 2a-4-30.103 2a-4-30.104 2a-4-30.105 2a-4-30.106 2a-4-30.107 2a-4-30.108 2a-4-30.109 2a-4-30.110 2a-4-30.111 2a-4-30.112 2a-4-30.113 2a-4-30.114 2a-4-30.115 2a-4-30.116 2a-4-30.117 Next
Last modified: October 11, 2016