In Storch v. Sauerhoff, 334 N.J. Super. 226, 233, 757 A.2d 836 (Ch.Div.2000), the Court defined the question, of whether or not a household member relationship exists, as whether the living situation "essentially places the plaintiff in a more susceptible position for abusive and controlling behavior in the hands of the defendant." In Storch, plaintiff's father married defendant, plaintiff's stepmother, 30 years before plaintiff sought protection under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act. Plaintiff had not resided with defendant and her father for approximately 19 years. However, for the last 11 years plaintiff and defendant lived at separate residences on the same block, and plaintiff's children and her half-sister's children (defendant's grandchildren) often played together on a lot "directly to the rear of plaintiff's home", which lot defendant often visited to be with the children. Id. at 233, 757 A.2d 836. Plaintiff attended "various dinners, family and religious functions at defendant's home," and "defendant on occasion cared for the plaintiff's children." Id. at 234, 757 A.2d 836. In rejecting defendant's contention that plaintiff was "neither a 'family' member, nor a member of the household", the court noted: While the defendant may not be a blood relative, the defendant has been a member of the plaintiff's family for the past 30 years. Moreover, the parties have maintained a close living arrangement for more than a decade. Id. at 233, 757 A.2d 836. The parties share, whether by choice or circumstance, a "substantial integrated family relationship" where each has separate sleeping quarters but must interact on a frequent basis. Id. at 235, 757 A.2d 836. In concluding that plaintiff and defendant were household members within the meaning of the Domestic Violence Act, the court held that "a determination as to a party's status as a 'household member' must be based upon 'the qualities and characteristics of the particular relationship and not upon a mechanical formula in a definition.'" Ibid.