Criminal to Destroy Joint Property?
Tempers often fly when a married duo decides to end their relationship. Angry words are often exchanged. Some become physical and become violent. Others express their rage by breaking cherished collections. Learn the magnitude of these actions. It could be criminal to destroy joint property. In fact, it might be considered a predicate act that could back up a domestic violence complaint.
It Could Be Domestic Violence
You may already know that the term “domestic violence” is not solely confined to negative encounters between wedded or divorcing couples. Those protected under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA) also include people involved in dating relationships, or others who have shared households as a family. Individuals who are expecting a child together may also seek protection under PDVA.
When most think about domestic violence, they most likely imagine physical altercations. Obviously, both assault and homicide are top on the list of acts of domestic violence. Here is an interesting question for consideration. Is it an act of domestic violence to destroy something jointly owned by the participants? Can one intentionally break something, claiming it was theirs to destroy? Or, could it be criminal to destroy joint property?
One Couple’s Experience
We will not hold you in further suspense. The answer, as decided recently by the New Jersey Appellate Division is that it could be criminal to destroy joint property. In N.T.B. v. D.D.B., A-4542-13T2 (App.Div. Sept. 9, 2015), the courts considered a scenario that involved the destruction of joint property.
In this matter, NTB was identified as the husband; DDB is the wife. The case involves two separate encounters between the couple. In the first, NTB was annoyed by the volume on the stereo. He promptly disabled the sound by pouring juice in the speakers. He then finished the speakers off by tossing them in the toilet. On another occasion, NTB was annoyed that his wife locked herself in the bedroom. He body slammed the door and broke it in the process.
The language of the Domestic Violence Act states that “criminal mischief” may be a grounds for its protection. Criminal mischief is defined by law as “purposely or knowingly damages tangible property of another.” The speakers and the house were both marital assets . Was NTB guilty of breaking another’s property since he jointly owned it?
The trial court decided that NTB was not guilty of criminal mischief since he damaged property that he partially owned. However, the Appellate Division disagreed. The parties had separate rights to the jointly owned property. It was therefore conceivable that NTB’s rage had destroyed a portion of DDB’s marital asset. This constituted criminal mischief as a predicate act of domestic violence.
Contact Us
Divorce can be an extremely emotional time. Sam Stoia is an experienced attorney who counsels his clients with compassion and knowledge. Contact Sam for a complimentary appointment to discuss your legal issues.