remember.

She needed less than three miles to reach her house located in the prestigious Sedgewood area. Her parents were one of the original people to settle in that community. They built a magnificent house, for its time. She wished the road were shorter. She was getting spooked. Of course, it was late, and she had only passed two cars on the way. The town seemed empty. The trees bent under the strong winds as rainbow leaves flew through the air. Bluefield always had the most beautifully painted trees during autumn. Clara felt something eerie, as if someone were watching her.

“Oh, come on Clara!” she chided herself. “Stop being paranoid. You let that old man spook you. Get a grip!”

Clara turned off the radio and continued on in silence.was premised on defendant's assertion that she could not receive a fair and unbiased hearing because of the prior relationship of the trial judge and her attorney. The assertion was based on the breakup of the law firm in which the judge and defendant's trial attorney were partners, and the resulting acrimonious litigation between the judge and her attorney.
Following the trial, the judge concluded that plaintiff-husband's interests in his business and investments, and in the marital home in Saddle River, were acquired with family gifts and therefore exempt from distribution, as were defendant's holdings in India. In light of defendant's exempt assets and her imputed income "in the very least ... sum of approximately $513,500 annually," the judge further determined that defendant was not entitled to alimony. Plaintiff,