In Ozolins v. Ozolins, 308 N.J. Super. 243, 705 A.2d 1230 (App.Div.1998), the court was called upon to consider which party bears the burden of proof in an application to terminate alimony based upon cohabitation. The court found that "there is a rebuttable presumption of changed circumstances arising upon a prima facie showing of cohabitation. The burden of proof, which is ordinarily on the party seeking modification, shifts to the dependent spouse to show that no economic benefit or detriment has been derived from the cohabitation." Id. at 248-249, 705 A.2d 1230. The court was in agreement with Frantz v. Frantz, 256 N.J. Super. 90, 93, 606 A.2d 423 (Ch.Div.1992), that "it would be unreasonable to place the burden of proof on a party not having access to the evidence necessary to support that burden of proof." Ozolins v. Ozolins, supra.