North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog

Articles Tagged with property division

Published on:

By: Carolyn J. Woodruff, JD, CPA, CVA
By

Patterson v. Chrysler Group Addendum

Shortly after the Sixth Circuit decided Patterson v. Chrylser Group, 845 F.3d 756 (2017), I first wrote about this case. Based on some recent comments, updating the blog with dates for clarification is necessary. The issue is when the statute of limitations starts on the qualification of a domestic relations order. It is proper to note that this dispute is between the Plan and the Alternate Payee or the Transferee Spouse.  The Plan Participant (ex-Husband)  is not a party and does not have standing. It is the Transferee Spouse’s vested benefit under consideration. Ex-Husband no longer has an interest. The Plan is the legal owner as Trustee of the retirement benefits. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Wall v. Wall, 536 S.E.2d 647, 140 N.C. App. 303 (N.C. App. 2000)

There are various legal mechanisms by which former spouses separate their personal and real property. One mechanism is Equitable Distribution (ED). Practically speaking, however, no division of property should be accomplished without first obtaining an Order/Judgment from the court. This is especially true for more valuable and unique assets like real property. So what happens if you have your hearing, but don’t get an Order in a timely manner? Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In North Carolina, a stipulation, in the legal context, is an agreement between the parties in a lawsuit. It is most commonly used by parties to extend deadlines for responding to discovery or to agree on a factual finding that is uncontested. It can be done to minimize costs in litigation, because there is no need to spend time proving something that is agreed upon. Good practice dictates that stipulations are written and signed by the parties and/or attorneys and then presented to the court. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Desai v. Desai, No.COA20-435 (July 2021) (unpublished)

An interim distribution is an order of the court that can be entered anytime after the filing of the equitable distribution (ED) claim and before the final judgment on equitable distribution. In these interim orders, the court can classify, value, and distribute certain assets or debts. This partial distribution can also provide for a distributive award that one party pays the other in exchange for the distribution of an asset or debt. So how does this affect the final judgment? Below is a case that explains simply what should happen. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Desai v. Desai, No.COA20-435 (July 2021) (unpublished)

Often in matrimonial cases, one party might question whether jewelry gifted to a spouse can be taken back in the property division phase of a separation and divorce. Jewelry and other assorted gifts often represent everlasting love and affection between spouses, so it is always slightly peculiar when one spouse requests the gift be returned. Below is a case about a special necklace given as part of a Hindu marriage celebration, and how our courts handled the issue. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Ostanek v. Ostanek, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-2319

Issues with division of retirement accounts are seemingly springing up all over the place. At heart in most of these cases is a domestic relations order. Those are the orders of court that instruct an entity to, in short, divide the retirement funds. And since many people that have these retirement divisions are finally reaching retirement age, they are findings issues with the orders. Below is an example of an issue in the Ohio courts. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Unpublished Opinion – No. COA19-566

 

Carmen Cousin and Terry Cousin were married for seventeen years.  They separated in May 2016.  Upon separating, Carmen filed a complaint, which included a claim for equitable distribution.  Terry then filed an answer, which included a counterclaim for equitable distribution.  In the final equitable distribution order entered by the court in July 2018, the court assigned a value of $26,070.00 to the parties’ 1965 Lincoln Continental.  The court considered evidence showing the car to be fully restored, thus assigning it that value.  Furthermore, the court awarded Terry the parties’ Myrtle Beach property and ordered him to refinance the mortgage into his sole name before receiving the deed from Carmen.  Terry timely appealed this equitable distribution order.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Dechkovskaia v. Dechkovskaia, 232 N.C. App. 350 (2014)

Equitable Distribution is a mechanism by which former spouses separate their personal and real property. Sometimes the spouses may have some marital (or divisible) interest in a third party’s property. One example is when a couple resides at one spouse’s parent’s residence, and the spouses make some improvement on the land that increases property value. That likely creates an interest in the improvement on the home, which can be attributed to one or both spouses in some manner. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In Equitable Distribution, we often ask clients about the debts that they accrued during the marriage and the value on the date of separation. This is because the judge is required to classify, value, and distribute marital property. But it may not always include debts incurred during marriage. The debts acquired by a spouse can be classified as marital, separate, or divisible, but only by showing that the debt has certain elements, required by law, can a debt be classified as marital. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Wall v. Wall, 140 N.C. App. 303 (2000).

Former spouses in North Carolina can split their property in an action for Equitable Distribution (ED). In order for the Court to make a decision on distributing property, it needs an inventory affidavit of all property owned as a product of the marriage. Occasionally, and especially in cases involving high-income parties, the inventory list can be extensive. Many times, there can be arguments regarding values of property. This can lead to some delay between the day of the hearing and the day of entry of a Judgment. Continue reading →