For divorced parents, the holidays often create tension with their ex, as they deal with sharing holiday time, dealing with issues of gift giving, their ex in-laws, and, at times, new paramours. I especially get complaints when one parents has not paid support--yet found the money to lavish their kids with the most expensive and desireable gifts of the year.
For divorced parents, one of the hardest things to deal with and accept is the arrival of your exes' significant other into the life of your child. The potential problems and concerns are almost too numerous to account for, although I have recently come across various articles written by divorced parents thanking their exes' significant other for the positive role they have played in their child's life.
In an interesting unpublished Appellate Division case, the court affirmed the trial court's ruling as to the length of an alimony award in a long term marriage despite limited duration alimony being awarded.
People are generally understanding of the law with regard to equitable distribution in a divorce, including the exemptions for pre-marital property and gifts/inheritences. However, when two people never get married but live together, their rights are less clear. Fortunately (or unfortunately depending upon which side of the equation you are on), the courts have equitable powers to ensure fairness.
A major issue for divorced parents surrounds requests for reimbursement of medical expenses and extracurricular expenses which are to be shared between the parents. Beyond the stress of the financial burden that a parent may be under when the reimbursements are not made and the stress of having to chase down the other parent for money, the accounting can be a nightmare. Worse yet, because the total sums of money may not be terribly significant, it is often not worthwhile to consistently file enforcement motions to get an Order confirming the amount of reimbursements that are due. Of course, it is never surprising to find that the other parent miraculously has reimbursable expenses of their own, for which they seek an offset but for which they have never previously requested repayment.
In an interesting published Appellate Division case, the Court considered whether the destruction of jointly owned marital property could form the basis of a claim for a Final Restraining Order with "Criminal Mischeif" serving as the predicate act.