Contested NJ Guardianship Cases Require Due Process and Clear Findings - A Reminder from the Appellate Division
- Alexander J. Kemeny
- 3 days ago
- 4 min read
In In the Matter of F.M.W., the court emphasized that when the fight is over who should be guardian, families are entitled to testimony, cross-examination, and a reasoned decision.
A Major Reminder for Families in Contested Guardianship NJ Disputes
Guardianship over an adult is one of the most serious actions handled in New Jersey probate court. A guardianship order can shift control over medical decisions, living arrangements, and finances away from the person and into the hands of a court-appointed guardian. That’s why a recent published Appellate Division opinion, In the Matter of F.M.W. (Docket No. A-0847-24), matters for families searching for a New Jersey guardianship attorney when a case becomes contested.
In F.M.W., everyone agreed the alleged incapacitated person needed a guardian. The dispute was over who should serve—a family member or the New Jersey Office of the Public Guardian for Elderly Adults. The Appellate Division held the probate court did not provide required due process protections and did not make the findings needed to support its decision.
What Happened in In re F.M.W. (A Middlesex County Guardianship Case)
The case arose from a guardianship matter filed in Middlesex County involving an elderly woman (identified by initials because the record is impounded). She lived with her sister and only relative, who served as caregiver. Adult Protective Services received an anonymous referral raising concerns about neglect and care arrangements, and the matter ultimately proceeded as a guardianship action.
Two physicians evaluated the woman and concluded she had severe cognitive impairment consistent with Alzheimer’s dementia and needed a plenary guardian. Protective Services filed a verified complaint and recommended appointment of the Public Guardian.
A court-appointed attorney filed a report opposing the sister’s appointment and raising concerns that the sister was not an appropriate guardian. The probate court held a telephonic hearing, noted incapacity was not contested, and appointed the Public Guardian while relying largely on the report and certifications without taking live testimony from witnesses in open court.
The Legal Takeaway: Due Process in a Contested Guardianship NJ Case
1) Guardianship is a two-step decision — and both steps matter
The Appellate Division reiterated that probate courts must:
Determine incapacity by clear and convincing evidence, and then
Decide whether guardianship should be general or limited and who should be appointed.
2) If the guardian choice is contested, families must have a real hearing
The opinion emphasized that, absent a jury demand on incapacity, the court must take “testimony in open court” to determine incapacity, and then appoint a guardian consistent with statutory and rule-based preferences.
Most importantly for many families: when the dispute is who should serve as guardian, due process includes the opportunity to call witnesses and conduct cross-examination—not simply argue over reports.
3) Probate judges must make findings and explain the decision
New Jersey courts are required to “find the facts and state…conclusions of law” in matters decided by appealable orders. The Appellate Division found the probate court did not provide the findings and reasoning necessary to support appointing the Public Guardian over the sister.
4) Family preference must be addressed—especially where a POA exists
The probate court acknowledged the law’s preference for family members, but the Appellate Division stressed that, at minimum, the court needed to explain why it rejected the family member and appointed a state agency—particularly where the record referenced the alleged incapacitated person previously giving her sister power of attorney.
Why This Decision Matters If You Need a New Jersey Guardianship Attorney
If you are a family member involved in a contested guardianship NJ matter, F.M.W. is a strong reminder that the process must be fair, complete, and supported by evidence. In practice, that means:
Disputes over “who should be guardian” may require witness testimony, not just written reports.
Families should be prepared for hearings where credibility and caregiving issues are tested through cross-examination.
Courts must clearly explain why a family member is being bypassed in favor of another person or the Public Guardian.
In short, a contested guardianship case can quickly become high-stakes probate litigation - especially when allegations involve neglect, access to medical care, or financial concerns.
How Kemeny, Ramp & Renaud, LLC Helps in Contested Guardianship and Probate Litigation
At Kemeny, Ramp & Renaud, LLC, we represent New Jersey families in contested guardianship litigation and related probate litigation, including cases involving disputes over who should serve, contested evidence, and challenges to proposed guardianship arrangements. Our trial attorneys can help you:
Prepare and present evidence for a contested guardianship hearing
Subpoena and examine witnesses (care providers, medical professionals, agency personnel)
Address caregiver allegations and disputes over medical decision-making
Advocate for an appropriate family guardian or challenge an unfit proposed guardian
Litigate related probate issues involving finances, benefits, and protective planning
If you’re facing a contested guardianship in New Jersey, don’t wait until decisions are made on an incomplete record. Speak with a New Jersey guardianship attorney who handles guardianship disputes and probate litigation.
Contact Kemeny, Ramp & Renaud, LLC today to discuss your guardianship dispute. Call or email our office to request a consultation.
