In a Decision – F.S. v. R.A.L., (an Unpublished Opinion) >> the Court Held:
The Appellate Division concluded that the Trial Court was not required on its own to appoint a Guardian for the spouse and that the Court is not required to express a view as to whether a Guardian would be necessary in the future. No such demand for a Guardian was presented at the Trial Court.
Plaintiff did not raise the issue below and now argues "[f]rom a practical view it might [be] more appropriate to let the divorce stand and just insist that all further legal proceeding[s] with [defendant] require a [GAL]." Because we do not give advisory opinions, we reject this suggestion. Furthermore, plaintiff has not explained what difference the appointment of a GAL would have made.