## Facts

- Robert P. Quarg married Barbara Quarg in 1956; they separated in 1958, never reconciled, and never divorced.
- After separation, Barbara’s contact with Robert was minimal for decades; she visited him once in hospice shortly before his death.
- In 1961, Robert began cohabiting with Francine Levy Quarg; they lived together continuously until Robert’s final hospitalization in 2004.
- Robert and Francine had a son (Jonathan) in 1962; Francine and Jonathan used Robert’s surname.
- Robert and Francine jointly owned a home deeded to them “as husband and wife” and represented themselves as married in insurance and other contexts.
- Robert died intestate on December 8, 2004; the estate included personal and real property.
- Francine and Jonathan filed probate litigation seeking recognition of Jonathan’s parent-child relationship and relief regarding distribution of the estate.
- The Probate Part treated Barbara as the legal surviving spouse but imposed a constructive trust on her intestate share in favor of Francine.

## Issues

1. Whether a constructive trust may be imposed on a surviving legal spouse’s intestate share based on an alleged implied or oral promise by the decedent to provide for a long-term cohabiting partner.
2. Whether long-term cohabitation and “holding out” as spouses, without divorce of the legal spouse, is sufficient to divert statutory intestate rights to the cohabiting partner.
3. What factual findings are required under the *Roccamonte* framework before equity may reach property otherwise passing under intestacy statutes.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division did not sustain the constructive trust as imposed.
- The court remanded for further proceedings to determine whether Francine proved an enforceable implied contract right against the estate under *In re Estate of Roccamonte*.
- The court indicated a constructive trust could be available as a remedy, but only after the trial court made contract-based findings regarding promise, consideration, and reliance, and tailored relief to the proven obligation.

## Legal Principles

- New Jersey intestacy statutes grant distribution rights to the surviving legal spouse; separation alone does not terminate statutory spousal status.
- A decedent’s promise to support an unmarried cohabiting partner may be enforceable against the estate if shown by evidence of an express or implied contract, supported by consideration and reasonable reliance.
- Long-term cohabitation and presenting as married may be relevant evidence of an implied promise, but does not itself override a legal spouse’s intestate share.
- A constructive trust is an equitable remedy to prevent unjust enrichment; it is derivative and cannot substitute for proof of an underlying legal or equitable obligation.
- Any equitable remedy affecting intestate distribution must track the scope of the proven contractual obligation rather than reallocating the estate based solely on fairness.

## Conclusion

The Appellate Division required a remand because the trial court imposed a constructive trust on the undivorced spouse’s intestate share without first making the necessary findings that the decedent formed an enforceable implied support agreement benefiting his long-term partner, as required for relief under *Roccamonte*.


In re Estate of Quarg, 397 N.J. Super. 559, 938 A.2d 193 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2008)