Missouri Divorce and Family Law Blog : Kansas City Divorce Lawyer & Attorney : Wortman Law Firm

As a practicing family and bankruptcy attorney, I consistently run into cases where people are dealing with both a divorce (or other family law related matter), as well as a bankruptcy.  This is because, many times, one is the cause of the other (this works both ways), and the cases often go hand in hand. That is probably no surprise considering the current economic climate, and if this applies to you, believe me, you are far from alone. Check out the numbers:  

Bankruptcy filings in the federal courts rose 31.9 percent in calendar year 2009, according to data released by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The number of bankruptcies filed in the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2009, totaled 1,473,675, up from 1,117,641 bankruptcies filed in 2008.

Filings have grown steadily since 2006, when bankruptcy filings totaled 617,660, in the first full 12-month period after the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) took effect. An historic high in the number of bankruptcy filings was seen in 2005, when over 2 million bankruptcies were filed just before BAPCPA took effect.

Filings by Chapter
In 2009, filings rose under Chapters 7, 11, 12 and 13 of the U.S. bankruptcy code.

·       Chapter 7 filings totaled 1,050,832 up 41 percent from the 744,364, Chapter 7 filings reported in 2008.

·       Chapter 11 filings rose 50 percent to 15,189, up from the 10,147 filings in 2008.

·       Chapter 13 filings were 406,962, up 12 percent from the 362,705 filings in 2008.

·       Chapter 12 filings totaled 544, up 58 percent in 2009, compared to 345 Chapter 12 bankruptcy filings in CY 2008.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a recent termination of parental rights case, the Court stated that statutory grounds of abandonment, neglect, and unfitness require clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. The Incarcerated parent’s diligent efforts at maintaining contact with child refuted such allegations. The “Child may suffer from Father’s absence, but getting in trouble before he knew about Child is no proof that Father now wants no relationship with her.” Failure to send money from 28¢ per day wages was de minimis. Incarceration does not raise the presumption of unfitness. The child’s best interests require only preponderance of evidence, but the issue never arises until statutory grounds are established. 

The entire opinion can be read here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I can’t think of how many times that I have had a client tell me, regardless of what the issue is that is in dispute, that the opposing party is “just worried about money” or that it is “all about the money” for him or her, and that is their sole motivation in the case. Or maybe it is the other way around. My usual response is “isn’t it always?” There are so many financial aspects of divorce that have to be balanced that if parties aren’t careful, they can end up in a big money mess. Here are a few of the big ones:

1.       2 households instead of one: Before a couple or family divorces, they live in one residence with one set of bills and expenses, paid by however much money the couple/parents bring in. Upon divorce, the same level of income still exists, but now there are two mortgages/rent, two sets of utilities, two sets of grocery bills, two car payments, relocation expenses, first and last month’s rent, and so on. Basically, double or so the expenses on the same income.  It is not hard to see how difficult this is in and of itself.

2.       Debts. These days, many families are just a paycheck or two away from real trouble with credit cards and other unsecured debts, and if there are significant debts involved in the divorce, a real challenge exists. Sure the court can divide the debts and assign liability to each spouse, but it doesn’t do much good if the net marital estate is significantly reduced or eliminated by the debt. A divorce is a separation of financial livelihoods, and when possible, it is a good idea to use assets in the marital estate to reduce or eliminate debt before dividing assets. The less debt after the divorce the better for both parties, even if on paper one spouse is supposed to be responsible for it. It is a future fight or bankruptcy filing waiting to happen.

3.       Child Support: Quite simply, nobody is happy with it. If you have to pay it, it is going to be perceived to be too much, and if you are receiving it, it is perceived to not be enough.  In Missouri child support is largely a mathematical calculation based on incomes and other expenses, and to some degree it is what it is.   But regardless, it another factor affecting the same level of income pre-divorce, and it will never make a party “whole” or maintain a pre-divorce standard of living.

4.       Maintenance: Although there is no mathematical formula the same holds true as does for child support, it is probably both too much and not enough,  and it is still going to have to come out of the same pot of money.  Unless the parties are very well off financially to begin with, to expect the same standard of living pre-divorce is usually unrealistic. Although appropriate in some cases of long marriage, large disparities in income, or other factors, maintenance in Missouri is awarded in a small percentage of cases.

5.       Health Insurance: Regardless of your politics on the issue, health insurance is expensive and upon divorce usually a former spouse cannot remain on the other spouse’s health insurance. So, unless both parties can get affordable health insurance, if such a thing exists, then this can be a big financial factor that likely may only have a handful of undesirable solutions.

6.       Attorney fees and case costs: On top of all of this, the divorce is a direct expense in terms of attorney fees and costs associated with the case. If the case is contested, then the total cost on the family is the sum of both spouses total investment in the case. Attorney fees are not usually awarded, which is all the more reason to try to approach the case in an informed and rational way, and try to keep costs and conflict down. The higher the conflict, the higher the cost every single time.

There are of course, other issues particular to certain cases, but regardless of how extensive the list may be, the bottom line is that divorcing spouses need to be smart and rational about how to separate financially and view their situation in a realistic way. Otherwise,  financial disaster in one form or another, certainly awaits.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In Missouri, there are two primary ways that a non-married parent can seek to establish child support, judicial and administrative.   A judicial action is through the circuit court, and an administrative action is through the Family Support Division. The Division is an administrative agency which has the power to issue binding orders for child support, which may or may not later be filed as a judicial action in the appropriate circuit court. The agency has their own administrative process, where a case worker calculates child support on information provided by the custodial parent, and the non-custodial parent is then served, usually by mail, with the notice of an order. The non-custodial parent is given the opportunity to dispute the amount calculated by the case worker, and request a hearing within a certain number of days. If the non-custodial parent does not act, then the order becomes final, and the non-custodial parent is bound without further legal process. However, if a hearing is requested, then a telephone “trial” before a hearing officer is conducted, and the child support is determined based on the evidence presented. Also, a parent can petition the circuit court for judicial review of the administrative order within 30 days of the entry of an administrative order, even after an administrative hearing.

However, the non-custodial parent must know that the hearing docket is backlogged for many months, sometimes even a year, and even after the hearing is conducted it may be many more months before the order is issued. Once the order finally is issued, it is set to take effect all the way back to the date that the case was started, so the non-custodial parent may have a year or more of back child support simply because of the slow administrative process, even though there was no order in effect for those months.  This can negatively affect the obligor's credit, and the arrearage is usually assessed at an additional amount per month, basically raising the child support by as much as a few hundred dollars.  Also, once all of this is over, there is an order for child support, but the agency does not have the power to issue orders for custody or visitation, and if the non-custodial parent is the father, essentially there are no legal rights established, other than the “right” to pay child support

The best course of action to take when served with an administrative action for child support is to immediately consult with an attorney. At a minimum, the attorney can represent the non-custodial parent at the administrative hearing to ensure the proper evidence is before the agency and that the support amount is calculated properly. But more importantly a good child support attorney may be able to, in effect, “move” the case to a circuit court before a judge through a judicial action, establish legal custody or visitation rights, ensure paternity is determined conclusively, terminate the administrative action, and remove the family support division from the case.   In a judicial action, unless state debt or interest is in issue, the Family Support Division or other state agency will not participate in the case.  Timing is everything however in dealing with these cases, so consulting with an attorney immediately is critical to avoid a potential financial mess.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On July 7, 2009, Governor Jay Nixon signed into law senate bill number 141, which modifies Missouri’s paternity laws, effective August 28, 2009. The new law revises sections 210.826, and 210.828 and adds a new section 210.854, which will now allow men who have been declared the father of a child by a court to petition to set aside the judgment and obtain relief from child support obligations when DNA testing shows that they are not the biological father, if filed within certain time limits.  

The provisions of the new paternity law are summarized as follows:

In an action to determine paternity of a child, a notification form shall be attached to the delivery of the petition through service of process. The notification form shall prominently state in bold face type as follows: "Important Notice. If you do not respond to this action, a judgment of paternity may be entered against you and you may be ordered to pay child support, medical support or reimburse someone for support previously paid for the child. You have the right to contest that you are the father of the named child and you have the right to request genetic testing to prove whether or not you are the father."

The act also provides that a person may file a petition to challenge entry of a judgment of paternity and support upon filing an affidavit stating that evidence exists which was not considered before entry of judgment. Such petition shall also include either an allegation that genetic testing was conducted within the past 90 days using DNA methodology, was performed by an expert, and that the test results indicate the petitioner is not the child's father or a request to the court for an order of genetic paternity testing using DNA methodology. The petition to set aside the judgment may be filed at any time prior to December 31, 2011. After that, the petition shall be filed within two years of the entry of the original judgment of paternity and/or support, whichever occurs later.

The court, after a hearing where all interested parties have been given an opportunity to present evidence and be heard and upon a finding of probable cause to believe the testing may result in a determination of non-paternity, shall order the relevant parties to submit to genetic paternity testing. The petitioner shall pay for the costs of testing.

The court shall grant relief, unless the court makes written findings of fact and conclusions of law that it is not in the best interest of the parties to do so, and enter judgment setting aside the previous judgment of paternity and child support, including a previous acknowledgment of paternity, extinguish any existing child support arrearage, and order the Department of Health and Senior Services to modify the child's birth certificate accordingly upon a finding that the genetic test was properly conducted, accurate, and excludes the petitioner as the child's father.

In addition, any petitioner may apply for expungement of criminal nonsupport records to the court in which the petitioner pled guilty or was sentenced. Such expungement shall only apply to records for criminal nonsupport of a child or children for which the petitioner was found not to be the biological father.

The provisions of this act shall not apply to grant relief to the parent of any adopted child nor shall such provisions be construed to create a cause of action to recover child support or state debt previously paid under court order. The petitioner shall not have a right for reimbursement of any monies paid previously under said order.

Beginning in 2010, the family support division shall track and report to the general assembly the number of cases known to the division in which a court, within the calendar year, set aside a previous judgment of paternity and support under the provisions of this act.

The entire text of the bill can be read here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

An issue that I have seen a few times, and that was recently before the Court of Appeals for the Southern District, involves the incorporation of maintenance (alimony) provisions into a Marital Settlement Agreement, where the agreement provides that the terms are not subject to modification.   

Extreme care should be used when drafting such a document, as many times these agreements have  "boilerplate" language either at the beginning or end of the document, which says that the agreement  is the entire agreement and it is not subject to modification or change. That is all well and good for a contract, and the parties would want that in there for most purposes. Legally that language is not effective for child custody, visitation, or support orders, but it would be necessary for the division or property provisions. 

The problem is with maintenance.  If the parties agree to a certain amount and schedule for maintenance, that would normally be modifiable unless stated otherwise.  However, if the "non-modifiable" language is buried elsewhere in the document, usually at the end, that would be effective to make the maintenance non-modifiable, which would put the paying spouse on the hook indefinitely.  Obviously this could be a very expensive, unintended mistake.

So, the parties should make very clear, in the same paragraph, the type and duration of the maintenance, as well as whether or not it is modifiable.  Also, they should make sure that the provisions for non-modification of the settlement agreement, which could be anywhere in the document, do not apply to maintenance, unless that is the intent of the parties.  Also, each party should just thoroughly read and understand the agreement before signing it, even the "legalease".

For a recent case dealing with this issue, click here

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a divorce proceeding, a personal injury settlement can be a major asset that will have to be divided between the parties. Missouri uses the "analytical" approach to determine whether the settlement proceeds are marital, non-marital, or both.

In a marriage dissolution proceeding, the trial court uses a two-step process for dividing property. The trial court must first set aside non-marital property before it divides marital property “in such proportions as [it] deems just.” Property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be marital, but the presumption may be overcome. A settlement for a personal injury claim occurring during the marriage may be both marital and non-marital.

To determine whether funds from a personal injury settlement are marital or non-marital, Missouri uses the “analytical” approach. Under this approach, also known as “replacement analysis,” the settlement award is classified by what it is meant to replace. To determine the intent of a settlement, a court may look to what the parties would have received if the claims had been adjudicated.  If the award is to compensate for separate, non-marital losses, it is non-marital property; to the extent it compensates for marital losses, it is marital property.

Under the analytical approach, compensation for loss of future, post-dissolution wages is non-marital property, while compensation for wages lost during the marriage is marital. Similarly, compensation for post-dissolution medical expenses is generally considered non-marital, while compensation for medical expenses during the marriage is generally marital.. Compensation for non-economic damages, such as “pain, suffering, disfigurement, disability, and loss of ability to lead a normal life” is generally considered the separate property of the injured spouse.

The Court of Appeals recently held that the trial court did not err in determining that post-dissolution payments due under the settlement agreement were properly characterized as non-marital property. To see the opinion, click here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Missouri Court of Appeals for the Southern District of Missouri has just recently upheld the Missouri exemption (protection from creditors) for Tenancy by the Entirety for jointly owned property by married couples.

Tenancy by the Entireties is a special form of property ownership that Missouri, and some other states, reserved for married couples only. Tenancy by the Entireties means that a husband and wife own property as one person, and each of them owns a 100% interest in the property.  This is different than co-tenancy, where each owner only owns their respective interest in the property (such as when two unmarried people own property – they each own only their half).

It is presumed that jointly owned property by married couples is tenancy by the entirety, and the presumption can only be rebutted by evidence that there was consent, agreement, or acquiescence that the property was not owned in this way. Tenancy by the Entirety property is fully exempt from creditors of one spouse, and is exempt in bankruptcy provided that only one spouse is filing. If both spouses file bankruptcy, the exemption does not apply, and if a creditor trying to collect a judgment is a creditor of both spouses, the exemption does not apply.

In the recent ruling, a creditor had obtained a judgment in another state, registered it in Missouri, and attempted to collect the debt by seizing assets (known as execution) that were jointly owned by a married couple. The Court held that, even though there was some evidence that the property was only owned by one spouse, it was not enough to rebut the presumption of tenancy by the entirety, and the property was exempt from collection.

To read the full opinion click here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

What happens when a parent tries to avoid a child support obligation because they are not working or only have a small amount of income? Well, in the eyes of the Court, that parent will be treated as if they did have income sufficient to pay the child support. The most common situation is when it is apparent that a parent is not working specifically to avoid child support, but there are many factors that the Court can consider when making this decision. This can happen in a divorce, paternity, or child support case, and it is called “imputed” income. The court can consider any relevant factor, and recent cases say the following:

For the non-custodial parent

• Any imputed income must be within a parent’s capacity to earn, and if a parent earned a different income prior to trial the court should consider that income in calculating retroactive child support.  
• Even if a parent did not try to evade child support, the court can impute higher income than earned if the parent has the earning capacity.  
• Imputed income must be supported by evidence, not speculation, and the court record must reflect how the income was figured.  
• The income imputed to an underemployed or unemployed parent must be according to what they could earn if using their best efforts to find employment
• The court can impute income if a parent has voluntarily and deliberately become unemployed, and a court should not do so if there is no showing of an attempt to evade responsibility
• If a parent is terminated and does not use best efforts to find new employment, refuses offers, or fails to show unemployment is only temporary, income may be imputed

For the custodial parent

• Factors include age, maturity of the child, availability of child care givers, relationship between the expense of child care and the net income the parent would receive, the reasons the parent stays home with the child.
• A court may not treat imputation of income on the Form 14 different than its maintenance calculation

Next installment: Adjustments to income for child support, maintenance, health insurance, and medical costs

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

With so many people facing bankruptcy in the current climate, it may be good news to know (depending on which side you are on, of course) that the bankruptcy does not allow a person owing a domestic support obligation to use bankruptcy as a way to avoid payment of the debt. In fact, virtually any obligation that is domestic in nature cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Here are a few facts:

• A domestic support obligation is not dischargeable in a Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 consumer bankruptcy proceeding. 
• “Domestic Support Obligation” is a debt that is owed to or recoverable by a spouse, ex-spouse, or child of the debtor or their guardian or representative, or a governmental unit (such as the Children’s division or the Court). This includes alimony, maintenance, child support, state assistance, even if the debt is not titled exactly in that manner. Also included is a debt arising out of a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement agreement.
• Also non-dischargeable in a Chapter 7 is any debt to a spouse, former spouse, or child not described above that is incurred by the debtor in the course of a divorce or separation or in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree, or other order of a court of record. Any debt that falling under this section may be dischargeable in a Chapter 13 debt adjustment, however.
• Domestic Support Obligations receive the number 1 priority for repayment in a Chapter 13 plan or when funds are available in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy estate.
• To summarize, if it is domestic in nature, it is going to have to be paid. This includes not only child support or maintenance, but also property and debt divisions, such as: marital estate equalization payments, payments in settlement, qualified domestic relations orders, contempt payments, divisions of debts, vehicle debts, mortgages, credit cards, lines of credit, personal loans, medical insurance, costs for non-covered medical care, retirement plan divisions, military retirement divisions, attorney fee awards, and the kitchen sink.
• No special language is necessary in the divorce settlement or decree to make these provisions apply, although it may be a good idea just to drive the point home.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

For the purposes of calculating child support in Missouri, the Form 14 calculation is used.  The starting point is the Gross Income of the parties.  So, what does that include and what exactly does it mean?  The following is a summary of the official comments and relatively recent court rulings on the definition.

“Gross income" includes, but is not limited to, salaries, wages, commissions, dividends, severance pay, pensions, interest, trust income, annuities, partnership distributions, social security benefits, retirement benefits, workers' compensation benefits, unemployment compensation benefits, disability insurance benefits, veterans' disability benefits, and military allowances for subsistence and quarters.

Overtime compensation, bonuses, earnings from secondary employment, recurring capital gains, prizes, retained earnings and significant employment-related benefits maybe included, in whole or in part, in "gross income" in appropriate circumstances.

Excluded from "gross income" is temporary assistance for needy families (TANF) payments, Medicaid benefits, supplemental security income (SSI) benefits, food stamps, general assistance benefits, other public assistance benefits having eligibility based on income, and child support received for children not the subject of this proceeding.

If a parent receives rents or royalties or is self-employed, in a sole proprietorship, or business with joint ownership, "gross income" is gross receipts minus the ordinary and necessary expenses incurred to produce such receipts.  

"Income" for purposes of computing the presumed child support amount consists of a financial benefit or money received by a parent that could have a positive impact on the parent's ability to support the parent's children.

Overtime Compensation

When determining whether to include overtime compensation, the Court must consider (1) Periods of temporary child custody, (2) The motivation of the parent working the overtime over the last three years. (3) The amount of the overtime. (4) The expectation that the overtime will continue, (5) additional dependents.

Overtime may be included in a parent’s yearly gross income in appropriate circumstances.  The Court must consider all relevant factors, including the realistic expectation that a parent who receives a bonus or overtime will continue to do so.  The court can ignore income history and look at a single year's income figure if it finds that figure to be the most accurate predictor of a parent’s income

Bonus and Significant Employment Related Benefits:

The same 5 factors listed above apply to bonus income. Additionally:

Bonuses are discretionary, and the court may accept or reject the reliability and pattern of bonus income. 

Expense reimbursements should not be included in monthly gross income on Form 14 because such reimbursements are a repayment or indemnification, which is compensation for loss or damage, as opposed to a benefit, which is profit or gain.

Next Installment:  Imputed income

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In this time of economic downturn, I am seeing quite a few people filing for divorce who have substantial debt problems, and many are considering, or needing, to file for bankruptcy. This is especially true considering that a large number of those considering divorce are doing so because of financial struggles. In this event, careful planning is required and each individual situation must be examined thoroughly. Below are some points to consider, not intended to advocate bankruptcy by any means, but just for general information on a situation that is very common.

If you can avoid bankruptcy, that is the best option. However, if required, it may be better to file bankruptcy before the divorce, considering:

• Missouri and Federal bankruptcy law will allow married couples to file jointly, eliminating the need for two separate bankruptcy filings and two separate attorney fees after the divorce.
• The parties can exempt (protect) double the amount of property if they file jointly
• Most married couples have joint debt.  Even though the divorce court can divide the debt, it cannot alter the contract with the creditor, meaning that if the spouse ordered to pay doesn’t, creditors are going to come after whoever’s name is on the account.  Then the only remedy is a contempt of court proceeding, which is time consuming (up to a year) and costly. All the while, the other spouse has to make the payment or suffer the credit consequences. Joint bankruptcy can eliminate the debt all together and avoid the problem of who pays who.
• Joint filing before the divorce will eliminate the need to litigate issue of debt in the divorce, which reduces the time and expense of the divorce, and avoids the result described above. Remember, a divorce decree is just a piece of paper, enforcing it is a whole different matter.
• Although the bankruptcy law will not allow a divorcee to discharge debts ordered in the divorce, the problem of collection and contempt may cause greater credit problems than the bankruptcy itself.
• Joint filing before divorce will allow for a higher income threshold for Chapter 7 qualification (means test avoidance)
• Joint filers can utilize Missouri’s double wild card exemption and the head of household exemptions with child exemptions (which can be significant).
• It most likely (almost guaranteed) that you can rebuild and re-establish your credit much faster than you could ever have paid off the debt, while at the same time getting the past problems behind you and truly getting a “fresh start”.
• Bankruptcy is not the end of the world. It can be an effective solution to a real problem that real people have during these times.

Please note that this list is not complete, and other issues may affect the analysis or timing of the filing. Seek legal advice for your particular situation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

Recent Case Summary

Statute requires interest on maintenance not paid. Neither "good faith . . . reliance upon what [Obligor] understood to be a valid court order" that no interest was due, nor Obligee's inconsistent theories on amount due, are a defense. Circuit Court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorney fees award "based on a variety of factors expressly authorized by" statute.

Case Holding

Appellant was entitled to statutory interest pursuant to section 454.520.3, RSMo, for the entire time period that Respondent failed to pay his full obligation under the divorce decree. The obligation to pay interest under section 454.520.3 is mandatory and is intended to compensate the recipient spouse, rather than punish the payor. Although Respondent may have relied in good faith on the circuit court's 2002 modification order, this court held that the 2002 order was null and void; Respondent's obligation to make $4,000 per month maintenance payments under the original divorce decree thus subsisted throughout the relevant period. On this issue the judgment is reversed, and remanded to the circuit court for calculation of the interest owing to Appellant.

The circuit court denied Appellant's request for attorneys fees and costs based on multiple factors, including Appellant's resources, the justiciability of the issue concerning the validity of the 2002 modification, Appellant's delay in seeking an attorneys fee award, and her conduct during the litigation. Pursuant to section 452.355.1, RSMo, the circuit court has broad discretion in deciding whether an award of attorneys fees is warranted. This court finds no abuse of discretion in the circumstances, and the circuit court's denial of attorneys fees and costs is affirmed.

Read the Full opinion here

Source for Post:  Missouri Bar

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Issue of attorney's fees often comes up in domestic litigation.  Missouri has adopted the American Rule regarding attorney's fees in that, absent statutory authorization or contractual agreemtn, each litigant, absent few exceptions, must bear the expense of their own attorney's feesl  However, Missouri's dissolution of marriage law allows the court to order one party to pay the other's attorney's fees, but the court must consider all relevant factors including the financial resources of both parties, the merits of the case, and the actions of the parties during the action.  The inability of one spouse to pay his or her own or the other party's attorney's fees is not determinitive.  Some examples supporting an award of fees would include unfounded allegations of child abuse, concealing assets, abuse of discovery, and failure to appear for trial. 

Recent Case
The Party seeking an award of attorney fees has the burden of proof to show that an award of attorneys fees is appropriate.  In the recent case cited below,  the record contains some evidence of father's financial resources—retirement and disability—but none on Mother's financial resources or on "any unusual circumstances warranting departure from Missouri's adoption of the American rule requiring each litigant to bear their own expenses." Circuit Court abused its discretion in awarding fees. Reversed.
Tina Marie Hihn, Respondent, v. Joseph Alexander Hihn, Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Discussed below is a recent ruling from the Western District of Missouri, where the Court, among other things, upheld the trial Court's ruling of imputation of income for child support and the award of attorney's fees. 

For calculation of child support, a trial court may impute income to a party according to what that party could earn by using best efforts to gain employment suitable to his or her capabilities.   Imputation is appropriate where the parent voluntarily reduces his or her income without justification. Further, Imputation is only proper where the trial court concludes from the evidence that the "parent has the capacity to earn more but voluntarily refuses to do so."  In imputing income, the directions to Form 14 indicate that the court may consider employment potential and probable earnings level based on the parent's recent work history, occupational qualifications, prevailing job opportunities in the community. 

As to the issue of attorneys fees, Missouri law permits the Court to award attorney's fees to a party, but it is not required to do so.  Generally the Court takes the position that each party must bear their own costs of litigation, and usually does not require one party to pay the attorney's fees of another party.  However, if the court does make such an award, the Court must consider all relevant factors including, the relative financial resources of the parties, the merits of the case, and the actions of the parties during the pendancy of the action.  In this recent case, the Court of Appeals stated in so many words that an award of attorney's fees would not be reversed if the award was arbitrary and unreasonable.

The summary of the case is as follows:

Circuit Court Need Not Award All Attorney Fees
Child's best interest does not necessarily require that Spouse who was caregiver during marriage has more parenting time after dissolution. Circuit Court properly imputed income to Spouse based on evidence of earning potential and desire not to achieve it. Actual income includes bonuses and benefits. In property division, Circuit Court need not credit Spouse with separate debts, including attorney fees, and need not award fees where much was spent litigating meritless issue. Payment of past maintenance did not waive contest of future payments, but Spouse did not show that the amount "was unwarranted, beyond [Spouse's] means to pay or so excessive as to constitute an abuse of . . . discretion. Rule allows award of half of transcript costs.
Sharlene Krepps, Appellant-Respondent, v. Richard Lee Krepps, Respondent-Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

One very important, and often overlooked, factor to consider as part of your dissolution of marriage is a re-evaluation, (or first evaluation as is often the case) of your estate plan.   If there is no plan in place, the laws that will determine how your estate will be divided upon your death change significantly when you are divorced.  If there is a plan in place, you will most certainly want to make changes for your future to match the changes in your life today.  Below are some very basic points on estate planning from about.com:

If you have assets, no matter what your age, marital status, or financial wealth, you should plan your estate in the event of your death or incapacitation. If you should die without a sound estate plan, someone will be exposed to additional grief and expense. If you become incapacitated, your bills might not get paid. You could also be put on life support which is OK unless you have strong feelings about your life being prolonged artificially if you have no chance for recovery. A little preparation and maintenance could make this difficult time less taxing for those you love and who love you.

There are many reasons to have a sound estate plan but here are eight I feel are most important. If you should die or become incapacitated, a sound estate plan could:

1. save your family thousands of dollars
2. distribute your assets to those of your choosing, not of the government's choosing
3. designate who will raise your minor children
4. make sure someone is authorized to pay your bills
5. avoid conflicts among your family members
6. make sure your assets aren’t divided among your children’s ex-spouses
7. keep your children from frivolously spending the inheritance
8. prevent death taxes.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The following article has recently appeared on at least a few of the family law blogs, which I found to be particularly interesting.  Thanks to the Oklahoma Family Law Blog and the Georgia Family Law Blog for sharing this information with us.

Marriage has become a delicate venture. According to the U.S. Census bureau, about nine out of ten people will marry sometime in their lives, but about half of first marriages will end in divorce. And while some marriages end peacefully, with both sides agreeing to an equal and fair settlement, some do not, and the ensuing process can get quite vicious.

When ex-spouses significantly distrust each other, it is advisable to engage the services of a lawyer, especially if one or both do not understand their household finances and the economic implications of marital settlements. In turn, attorneys often hire CPAs as forensic accountants to help represent the spouse who doesn’t have access to the family’s financial information. In these cases, the forensic analysis might include reviewing financial data to determine its accuracy and reasonableness; determining each spouse’s standard of living and disposable income; locating hidden assets; and determining what property may be considered separate from marital property, especially if one of the spouses runs a closely held business. This type of work has created a highly focused segment for the profession: forensic accounting in divorce engagements.

Marriage: The Leading Cause of Divorce? Out of the more than 2 million marriages performed last year, 60% were the first marriage for both bride and groom. Unfortunately, for those first marriages that do end in divorce, the average length of a first marriage is only about eight years. The median duration of second marriages that end in divorce is only about seven years.       

Most newlyweds probably don’t think of their wedding day as the beginning of a personal business partnership: making money, budgeting, accumulating assets, and investing for the future. Nevertheless, couples should still plan how to divide this property at the blissful beginning, not the bitter end. This planning could take the form of a premarital agreement, which may not be a perfect document, but is generally enforceable in all 50 states. This is why both spouses must understand their household’s finances. It is not a good idea to allow one spouse to run all the finances while the other spouse knows nothing about it. After all, the person you plan to spend the rest of your life with would never try to hide something from you … or would they?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Considering the fact that financial issues are a significant cause of stress on the family, I thought the following article, recently published at msnbc.com provided some very useful information.  It is republished below:

Most Americans have no emergency savings, a new survey shows. The findings are consistent with a host of other surveys and government data that chronicle Americans' abysmal savings rate and, more important, our lack of preparedness for life's unexpected events.

Released Monday at a press conference designed to call attention to "America Saves Week," the survey by the Consumer Federation of America and other consumer agencies indicates that only 40 percent of adult Americans maintain separate emergency savings accounts. And about one-third of those savers have set aside less than $2,000 for that inevitable rainy day.

Even $2,000 is considerably less than the 3- to 6-months of living expenses that most personal finance advocates recommend as an emergency kitty. Coincidentally, it is exactly the amount Hurricane Katrina victims received in "expedited assistance" aid from the federal government in the days after the storm. Thousands of victims didn't get the benefits because of computer glitches and other technicalities, and many of them were left with nearly no means of support after their homes and jobs were washed out by the storm. The Katrina aftermath shined a harsh light on the financial preparedness of many American consumers.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Bankruptcy treats debts that were incurred in the course of a divorce or legal separation differently than run of the mill third party debts. The most common kinds of debts incurred during divorce are 1) the obligation of one spouse to pay the other a sum of money in connection with division of the marital property; and 2) the obligation to protect the other spouse from the debts to third parties awarded to the debtor for payment.

Section 523(a)(15) of the Bankruptcy Code makes debts incurred in divorce non dischargeable in Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 cases. Gone, in the amended bankruptcy code, is the provision that called for a weighing of the hardships that discharge might impose on the non debtor spouse. Such debts are now flat-out non dischargeable.

The distinction to be noted is that the debtor can discharge the obligation to Big Credit Card Company, awarded to him for payment in the divorce, but he can’t discharge his obligation to his ex to hold her harmless should Big Credit Card Company sue her for the debt.

In Chapter 13, however, those debts are dischargeable, without debate.

In every chapter in the bankruptcy code, spousal support, alimony and child support are non dischargeable.

Source for Post: Bankruptcy Law Network and Moran Law Group

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Kansas Family Law Blog had a great posting recently about the deductibility of attorney's fees, which I have set forth below.  For more information on this issue, see the tax archives of this blog

It’s that time of year again. Of course, the general rule is that lawyers’ fees and costs in connection with obtaining a divorce are not tax deductible. As with many general rules, there are exceptions:

1. Attorneys’ fees related to tax advice. I.R.C. §212(3). Areas having tax implications upon which an attorney may offer advice include the tax effect of the distribution of property, including retirement plans, tax deductibility of interest payments or installments to effectuate an equitable distribution of property, the allocation of the dependency exemption and child tax credit, whether a joint tax return should be filed, the tax effect of unallocated maintenance and child support, the tax implications of the form of alimony, and advice regarding the recapture of front end loaded maintenance in the first three years following separation.

Practice tip: it is not helpful for the client wishing to tax deduct some attorney fees to have a provision in the marital settlement agreement that no tax advice was given.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The following are some infomative and useful tips on the sale of a residence in divorce from divorcehq.com

For many people going through a divorce their biggest asset is their home or in legal speak, the marital residence. Deciding what to do about the marital residence is often a major issue in a divorce. There are a few different options when it comes to splitting the marital residence.

One option is for one spouse to keep the house and buy out the other spouse's share. Another option is for one spouse to be granted exclusive use for a specified period of time, usually when the youngest child turns 18, after which the house will be sold. Finally, the house can be sold outright with the profits being allocated to each spouse.

Should you sell your house? Hard as it may be this is a decision that needs to be made devoid of emotions. As a practical matter take into consideration whether or not it is financially beneficial to keep the home. If not and you do decide to sell here are a few tips to help you through the process.

Time is money: Put your home on the market as far in advance as possible of purchasing a new one. Remember that when people buy and sell a home there usually is a domino effect. Closing and moving dates have to be coordinated, and the more firmly everyone commits to a window of dates and sticks to them, the better for all involved. Put all agreements about dates in writing, and protect yourself by negotiating financial penalties for failure to live up to the agreement.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Separation Agreement gave Amway distributorship to Wife for monthly payments to Husband. That payment was considered support because nothing else provided maintenance, the payment was in installments, it was subject to modification based on Amway profits, and it terminated on death of Husband. Trial Court erred in characterizing Wife's debt to Husband as a property settlement, dischargeable in bankruptcy, rather than nondischargeable support.

Author’s caveat: This case was decided under the bankruptcy law as it was before October 17, 2005. Under the new bankruptcy law, all domestic support obligations, which include alimony, child support, and property division, are generally non-dischargeable in bankruptcy.

To read further: Alticor, Inc., and Quixtar, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. Harold W. Grissum, Defendant-Appellant, and Joyce C. Soldi, Defendant-Respondent. Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District

Source for Post:  The Missouri Bar

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

QUESTION:

My fiancée has asked about putting her name on the deed to my house after we get married. I don't want to do that in case things don't work out and we divorce. But I've heard that when I marry all of my assets automatically become half hers, anyway. I should say that I will be the only one paying for the mortgage and home improvements. What does the law say, and will a premarital agreement remedy the situation?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Learn about tax breaks available to most parents.

New parents often find themselves overwhelmed by the expenses that come with a baby. From nursery furnishings to "onesies" to countless diapers, your little bundle of joy is going to cost you, well, a bundle. Fortunately, the federal government offers a number of tax breaks to offset the cost of raising a child. Here you'll learn about two tax breaks for which most parents qualify: the dependent exemption and the child tax credit.

The Dependent Exemption

You might be surprised to learn that the IRS does not tax every single dollar that you earn. Instead, the IRS gives you a very modest tax exemption ($3,200 per person in 2005) to cover your basic living expenses. Single people can take one exemption for themselves. Married couples can take two exemptions (one for each of them).

When you add a new child to your family, you can add one more exemption to your income taxes -- called a "dependent exemption." This means that you get an additional tax deduction of more than $3,000 every year until your child turns 19 -- a nice baby gift from Uncle Sam!

In terms of actual tax savings, the amount you save with the dependent exemption depends on your tax bracket. The higher your tax bracket, the more savings you get -- unless your income is so high that you cannot claim the exemption at all (see below). For example, if you were in the 10% tax bracket, you would save about $320 per child with the dependent exemption in 2005. But if you were in the 25% tax bracket, the dependent exemption would save you $800 per child.

Like many tax breaks, however, the dependent exemption is phased out for higher earning families. For the 2004 tax year, for example, married couples filing jointly could not claim the dependent exemption at all if their adjusted gross income was more than $336,550, and they lost a portion of their dependent exemption if their adjusted gross income exceeded $214,050.

If you qualify for the dependent exemption, claiming it on your tax return is easy. Simply complete line 6C of Form 1040 or Form 1040A, making sure to provide a Social Security number or Adoption Taxpayer Identification Number for your child in column 2. (See Social Security Numbers and Why Your Baby Needs One.) Also be certain to complete line 41 of your Form 1040 or line 26 of your Form 1040A.

The Child Tax Credit

The dependent exemption is not the only tax break that parents can claim. Provided that your income is below a certain limit ($130,000 for married couples filing jointly in 2004), you can also claim the child tax credit. The child tax credit trims your tax bill by $1,000 per child. Because it is a credit, and not a deduction, the child tax credit gives you $1,000 back in your pocket for every child that you have.

To determine the amount of the child tax credit you can claim, complete the child tax credit worksheet contained in IRS Publication 972, Child Tax Credit. (You can download this publication for free from the IRS website at www.irs.gov.) Then enter the amount of your child tax credit on your tax return (line 51 of Form 1040 or line 33 of Form 1040A). Also complete line 6C of Form 1040 or Form 1040A and provide a Social Security number or Adoption Taxpayer Identification Number for each child. Finally, check the box in column 4 of line 6c for each child for whom you are claiming the child tax credit.

Copyright © 2005 Nolo

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks