North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog

Articles Posted in ClientVille

Published on:

By

Ex-football star Clinton Portis is in hot water for non-payment of child support. Portis was a second-round pick by the Denver Broncos back in 2002, then was traded to Washington.  He is also a two-time Pro Bowler whose NFL earnings exceeded $43 million during his career until he retired in 2012.  Despite this, Portis filed for bankruptcy in 2015, claiming mismanagement of funds by his financial advisors. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Argueta v. Baker, 137 A.D.3d 1020, 27 N.Y.S.3d 237 (2016)

There are times where parents do not effectively co-parent. There are even times where one parent goes out of their way to interfere in the parent-child relationship with the other parent. There are ways to enforce the controlling custody order, such as contempt. But New York seems to also have another avenue of relief, asking the court to terminate child support. Note: this is not North Carolina law, it is from New York. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Harris v. Harris, 352 S.E.2d 869, 84 N.C.App. 353 (N.C. App. 1987)

In the case above, the plaintiff was ordered to pay to defendant an Equitable Distribution (ED) distributive award in the amount of $23,706.82, but payment of the award was postponed until the parties’ youngest child reached age 18 or graduated from high school. The Court of Appeals reversed because, at the time, such a postponement would have extended the distributive award to seven years after the termination of the marriage. This was significant, as the court is not to order a distributive award that would be paid “over such an extended time period that the payment thereof will be treated by the Internal Revenue Service as ordinary income.” Here, the courts look to IRS regulations to prevent taxes on the transfer of property incident to divorce, and IRS rules say gains or losses that result from transfers are not treated as ordinary income if they relate to the cessation of the marriage. However, if a transfer occurs more than six years after the termination of the marriage, one presumes it is not related to the cessation of the marriage. 26 CFR § 1.1041-1T.  That would be rebuttable but involves more work. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Mendez v. Mendez, 2021-NCCOA-680 (2021)

  • Facts: Plaintiff was ordered to pay defendant $2,271 per month in child support pursuant to a child support order filed in 2015. In 2018, Defendant filed a motion to modify child support. Defendant’s monthly gross income was $3,964. She asserted that the children’s needs have increased with their age, including involvement in new extracurricular activities such as music, fencing, and acting classes. For the initial 2015 order, Plaintiff made much more income. He was a department of defense contractor, owned a business, and VA disability benefits. In 2019, Plaintiff’s VA benefits were increased due to his diagnosis with prostate cancer. In 2018, Plaintiff was admitted to law school and would be attending when his cancer treatments ended. The trial court reduced Plaintiff’s child support obligation due to his decreased income. Defendant appeals.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Every January 1, countless people make resolutions to change the type of person they will be for the next calendar year. Favorites areas for improvement are health, education, and motivation. I will exercise at the gym every day. I will become vegan. I will read 100 novels by the end of the year. I will argue before the Supreme Court. All of these are very good, very productive, very intense goals. The funny thing is that these resolutions have one thing in common: they all kind of lack fun. Think about it, isn’t that why they are resolutions and not habits by now? So, while I certainly applaud lofty resolutions, here are a few that are less intensive and more fun. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In our last post, we wrote and talked about the basics of non-fungible tokens, or NFTs. They have some value on the market, and when things have value there will be a fight. When I first heard that a Nyan cat NFT sold for hundreds of thousands, and then when a simple picture of a Shiba Inu dog (the image at the heart of the the memecoin dogecoin and, predating that, just the general doge meme) also sold for a bunch of money, I began to wonder how copyright worked in this new NFT realm. Clearly, there was an artist that created the Nyan cat gif/meme/video, just like there would be a dog owner and photographer for the Shiba. Who should be getting paid from the sale of the associated NFTs? Continue reading →

Published on:

By

We’ve recently been writing about virtual currency, blockchains, and a regulatory sandbox for Fintechs. If you follow any of those topics with interest, you’ll very likely have heard of non-fungible tokens, or NFTs. NFTs are no longer questionable internet pictures but have moved into the mainstream. (Even Dolce & Gabbana has joined the NFT bandwagon.) Whether the trend has staying power is another question, but to early investors the NFT world is one filled with opportunity. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Clark v. Clark and Barrett, 2021-NCCOA-653 (2021)

  • Facts: The Clarks were a married couple in North Carolina. In 2016, Husband began an affair with Ms. Barrett, in Virginia. That same year while home in North Carolina, Wife discovered text messages between Husband and Barrett. Husband finally left the marital home after Wife threatened to call Barrett and ask about the affair. Husband’s intimate relationship with Barrett went as far as conceiving a child with Barrett via in vitro fertilization. Things became contentious. In March of 2018, Wife began to interact with Husband on a social network named Kik, wherein Husband was using an alias. Husband, using the alias, sent a message to Wife containing a topless photo of Wife, and saying that this photo was being circulated in internet chat rooms. In May, Wife discovered the same photo on a Facebook “weight loss” advertisement, but with the nipples censored. Wife sued Husband for violating the revenge porn statute, NCGS 14-190.5A. Husband was found to have violated the statute. He appealed.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

We’ve all experienced trying times during the pandemic. From school and business closures throwing a wrench in our daily plans to mask-wearing as the new normal, the pandemic has brought about many disputes and concerns, especially among divorced parents who share custody of their children. One Washington State father, Richard John Burke, is paying the price of his actions related to the pandemic after pleading guilty to three counts of first-degree custodial interference in late August.

Burke shares three sons aged 6, 7, and 10 with his ex-wife. On March 24, Burke was supposed to return his three sons to their mother pursuant to a court-ordered parenting plan.  Instead he communicated to his ex-wife that he would be keeping his three sons for an additional four days.  Then, on March 28, Burke failed again to return the children to their mother. On March 29, the children’s school called the mother to let her know Burke had contacted them to state the children would no longer be attending school and to unenroll them immediately.

Burke pushed conspiracy theories about masks and the COVID-19 vaccine. He believed that the children’s school’s masking policy was “an absolute crime,” and also stated that one of his sons “will never be vaccinated again.” Upon deciding that he needed to take extraordinary measures to “protect his boys,” Burke fled with the three children. A judge authorized a $500,000 warrant for Burke’s arrest, and he was eventually taken into custody in Santa Rosa, New Mexico.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

North Carolina’s statutes include a provision, chapter 50B, for an individual who is in a personal relationship to apply for a protective order. The name given is domestic violence protective order, and it is an Order of the court that accomplishes three things; the defendant must avoid certain acts, they must avoid specific locations (such as a the plaintiff’s home), and awards temporary custody of minor children to the nonoffending party. However, 50B actions are only applicable to parties that are in a personal relationship. That means spouses and former spouses, dating partners, current and former household members, parents, and a few more categories. The rule is that the parties share a personal history. Continue reading →