Miller v. Miller, (App. Div. 2007) Sat Below: Hon. Roger Daley, J.S.C. (Middlesex County)
The appellate court notes that, while the parties’ Property Settlement Agreement is not clear and unambiguous on its face with respect to the defendant-father’s obligation to pay his son’s college costs, it nevertheless disagrees with the trial judge’s conclusion that, because the PSA explicitly spells out, in one paragraph dealing with summer camp, that “tuition” includes room and board, the unmodified word “tuition” in another paragraph must be read to have the same meaning for purposes of defendant’s college cost obligation. The order requiring defendant to pay tuition, room and board is reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings.