For the past decade, divorce lawyers and family law judges have been grappling with a major question left open when the legislature passed an amendment to the alimony statute, which, for the first time, referenced "cohabitation" as a basis for adjusting alimony payments.

It may sound like a niche issue, but the resulting confusion over how parties can prove their former spouse is cohabitating with another and what the minimum evidentiary threshold is for bringing such claims led to thousands of motions being filed, countless hours of argument and a patchwork of case law, where a certain argument or factual showing in one county could lead to completely different results in the next county over.

That all changed after Einhorn, Barbarito, Frost, Botwinick, Nunn & Musmanno attorney Matheu Nunn's landmark win before the state Supreme Court in Cardali vs. Cardali.

Nunn, a finalist for the New Jersey Attorney of the Year, represented a man who believed his ex-wife was in a long term romantic relationship that fit the definition of cohabitation. The ex-husband had extensive surveillance of his ex-wife, but the trial court found he lacked any financial documents to establish the financial relationship between his wife and her apparent paramour, and therefore there wasn't enough proof to allow the case to move to discovery on the merits.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court reversed, saying that such a "high bar [was] not intended" for making a prima facia showing, and that obtaining such financial documentation might not be possible without allowing discovery.

The win, according to the Law Journal Editorial Board, was "right on the law and extremely helpful[.]"

It's just one of at least three significant wins Nunn notched before the Supreme Court this year, which also included filing as amicus for the state bar association in Facebook v. State to secure a win on Fourth Amendment grounds, and acting as amicus in a case that eventually helped contain the costs for using court reporters.

When it comes to finding success before the Supreme Court, Nunn said his strategy is much the same for how he prepares for argument in front of the Appellate Division as well—he prepares not just for his arguments, but also develops counter-arguments against the opposing party's position.

"When you get to the Supreme Court, there really shouldn't be any surprises about what the issues are," he said. "It's really about being able to answer the justices' questions and whether there are any public considerations that may stem from the court's decision."

However, despite the wins, Nunn said he feels that the most important work he accomplished over the year was his work co-chairing the New Jersey State Bar Association's Putting Lawyers First task force, which assessed mental health in the profession. The group, which began in 2022, ultimately issued a  500-page report highlighting the mental health and substance abuse problem facing the industry, and included around 200 recommendations.

Along with the gratifying work of developing concrete steps the bar could take to address the issue, Nunn said co-chairing the task force also helped him gain an appreciation for the difficulties solo practitioners face.

"Solo practitioners are doing everything all the time," Nunn said, noting his firm has a team of administrators that allow him to focus solely on practicing, networking and doing other work like lecturing. "It's a different level of stress they're enduring."

Nunn said he didn't start out his career expecting to a focus on matrimonial and appellate law. According to Nunn, his career path started out less from a burning desire to handle divorces and more from the economic collapse of 2008, known as the Great Recession.

After graduating Rutgers School of Law in 2007, Nunn did a clerkship with Superior Court Judge Theodore Bozonelis, expecting it would help land him at job at a top New Jersey firm. Midway through the clerkship, Appellate Division Judge Jack Sabatino asked him if he'd like to be his clerk, and Nunn said he agreed, thinking that would make him an even more desirable candidate for the biggest firms in the state.

"I thought, if I do an appellate clerkship, the jobs will still be there afterwards," he said, but that was not the case, as most firms slashed the number of associates they brought on as a result of the economic collapse.

Instead, Nunn became a prosecutor. But the unexpected path proved pivotal, he said, as he was able to gain both trial and appellate experience. According to Nunn, he made the leap to civil work after three years, when Einhorn Barbarito's Bonnie Frost told him the firm needed a strong litigator to handle a range of work, including in the family law, criminal and appellate arenas.

Now, he said, half of his practice is divorce, while the other half is general appellate work.

As for how he picks and chooses which cases he wants to handle, Nunn said it's mostly about what he finds interesting.

"If it's something that's intellectually stimulating to me, I typically will agree to do it," he said. "In some instances I'm compensated. Some not. But it keeps the mind sharp and keeps you thinking and learning new subjects."