In a Decision – Landau v. Landau, , (a "Reported Decision") >> the Court Held:
The Appellate Division reversed the Decision of the Trial Court allowing discovery because the Trial Court did not find a prima facie case but rather simply a ‘sufficient showing’.
Husband alleged that Wife and her other had traveled together, attended social activities as a couple, engaged in activities with the parties' children, and publicly acknowledged their relationship. Wife opposed the motion, arguing that having a boyfriend was not tantamount to cohabitation, asserting that she and her boyfriend paid their own way when traveling together and only occasionally slept over at each other's homes. The trial court deferred a ruling on whether Husband had made a prima facie case for his motion but concluded that he had made a sufficient showing to grant him discovery to make a prima facie case.
The Appellate division acknowledged the difficulties in proving cohabitation but held that it did not warrant invasion of a party's privacy through discovery. Instead, the court held that a moving party was first required to make a prima facie case before being entitled to discovery.