After the parties’ 2008 divorce, one party proceeded to file 35 subsequent motions to the Court, each making the same claims and seeking identical relief. When the motions were denied, the litigant sought review by the Appellate Division, while also filing new motions in the trial court before different judges, perhaps in an attempt to obtain a different result from a different judge.
Under these circumstances, the Appellate Division in DiDonato v. DiDonato upheld the trial court’s limitation placed on the party filing repetitive and redundant applications. The trial court held that the party needed the court’s permission to file future motions, and must ultimately convince the court that there was a change in circumstances warranting a new application. Accordingly, in cases of frivolous and vexatious motion practice, a court has the ability to restrain a party from acting in bad faith and filing such applications.
There are cases where legal fees are unnecessarily driven higher by a recalcitrant litigant. This case should be able to help stop this otherwise uncontrollable and unnecessary behavior. If similar issues are occurring in your case, please contact me to discuss a resolution to this problem at firstname.lastname@example.org.