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

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 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

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

To show transmutation of separate property to marital property requires evidence of owner’s clear intent to contribute the property.  Commingling is not enough.  Wife’s contributions to Husband’s separate property did not transmute into marital property, but did support an equalization payment to Wife in proportion to her contribution.   Court of Appeals awards Wife slightly less than Circuit Court. 

Sheilafaye Goodwin, Respondent, v. Charles Lewis Goodwin, Appellant

Missouri Law pertaining to Marital and Separate Property

Section 452.330 governs a trial court’s distribution and classification of marital and non-marital assets. That section requires that the trial court set aside to each party their non-marital property and divide the marital property equitably.  Generally, property owned by one spouse prior to the marriage will remain non-marital property and will be awarded to the owner of that property.   Moreover, "property which would otherwise be nonmarital property shall not become marital property solely because it may have become commingled with marital property." Property acquired before the marriage and which remains titled in the name of the original owner is separate property unless the record shows that the owner intended to change the status of the property from separate to marital.’ By contrast, if the owner intended to change the status of the property from separate to marital, it becomes marital." To transform the nature of the property from separate to marital, "[a] ‘clear intention’ to contribute to the community or to the other spouse must be demonstrated."      "[C]ourts must set aside a spouse’s separate property in dissolution cases, and property is deemed separate or marital based on the source of funds that financed the purchase

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

After divorce, it is common for the parties to agree to sell their marital home, or it may be ordered by the Court.  It is also common for one party to keep the home, and "buy out" the other spouse for their share of the equity.  In the current market however, sometimes this is not possible, and the value of the home is such that a sale will not bring enough proceeds to cover the outstandig mortgages.  In this situation, divorcing spouses may have no choice but to consider a short sale.  The following article, recently posted on the New Jersey Law Blog, explains a short sale, and the possible benefits and risks.

A short sale is when the proceeds from the sale of a home are not sufficient to fully pay off all outstanding debts which are secured by the property (mortgages) after first deducting the homeowner’s costs of selling the property.  In such instances, the selling homeowner can either bring funds to closing to make up the difference, or obtain approval from his mortgage holders to accept a reduced amount to satisfy his outstanding loans. 

Unless a homeowner is able to pay off all of the mortgages which are secured by his property, the homeowner will not be able to convey good title to a buyer.  If the homeowner is unable to obtain a sales price which enables him to pay off all loans and closing costs, and he does not have the funds to make up the difference, then he may want to try to obtain approval from his current lender(s) to accept an amount less than the full amount due on its mortgage.  For a lender, this may be acceptable to obtain repayment of a substantial amount of its loan and to avoid the costs and delay of foreclosing on the loan.  This will generally mean that the Seller will not receive any funds from the sale of his home.

In order to obtain such approval from a lender - which may or may not be granted - the homeowner needs to contact his lender(s) to determine what information they will need to make their decision.  This usually includes a financial statement of the homeowner, copy of a contract of sale, appraisal, and other pertinent documents.  Generally, a lender will not consider approving a short sale without a clear economic hardship on the part of the homeowner and an existing default or pending foreclosure.

Until recently, forgiveness of a debt under these circumstances, could trigger a taxable event according to the IRS.  This means that if a lender forgave a part of the mortgage debt by accepting a reduced amount in full satisfaction of the loan, then the amount forgiven could be deemed taxable income to the homeowner.  This was so even though the homeowner received nothing from the sale.  However, in December 2007 Congress passed the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007.  This Act amends the Internal Revenue Code to exclude from gross income amounts attributed to a discharge of indebtedness incurred to acquire a homeowner’s principle residence.  The amount of the debt forgiveness can be up to $2.0 million.  Thus, a homeowner is now able to sell his home for less than what is owed on it without incurring an additional tax liability.   This exemption for forgiven debt, however, is only temporary and expires within three years.

Source for Post: New Jersey Law Blog

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Distribution DecreasedMarital property may include property titled in one spouse’s name, and increase in property value if financing paid for with marital income.  Court of Appeals adjusts values of property and amounts distributed to Wife. Respondent may raise error as to Circuit Court rulings without a cross-appeal if it helps maintain a judgment favorable to her.  Pre-nuptial agreement was erroneously entered into evidence because it was relevant to an affirmative defense, not plead.
Lavonne Carol Holman, Respondent, v. William Hill Holman, Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District

Source for Post: The Missouri Bar

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The following article was recently published by Jimmy Atkinson on his blog Ask the Advisor.  This article addresses a very important issue in a dissolution of marriage proceeding, the division of debt.  If not done properly or completely, outstanding debts can cause disasterous consequences to a sometimes innocent party.  The fact is, a Court can order a party to a divorce to pay a certain debt, but the court cannot alter the relationship of the parties with their creditors.  This means that, for example, if Husband and Wife are jointly on a credit card account, and the court orders Wife to pay the debt, if Wife does not pay,  the creditor can and likely will still come after husband for payment.  It is then up to Husband to pay the debt and try to recover the money from Wife in an enforcement or contempt proceeding.  This is a costly and time consuming process that can be avoided with proper planning, and this is why It is important to remove names or transfer debts into the name of the person who is obligated to pay prior to the divorce. 

The article contains additional infomation and is reproduced in its entirety below

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Death Moots Appeal
Father's death mooted Mother's appeal of visitation provisions in judgment. As to Third-Party Respondent, Mother's appeal of property division is supported by evidence in the record, so Court of Appeals affirms. "[T]his Court accepts as true the evidence and reasonable inferences . . . in the light most favorable to the trial court's decision [and will] disregard all contradictory evidence and inferences . . . contrary to the court's decision."
Mary Margaret Holtgrewe, Appellant, v. Kurt Lawrence Holtgrewe, Respondent, Marlene V. Holtgrewe, Third Party Respondent. Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District

Stalking By Text Messaging Not Proven
Plaintiff alleged that Defendant's contacts alarmed her, but testified merely that Defendant's text messages and telephone calls bothered her. Such evidence was insufficient to support a full order of protection.
Christinia M. George, Respondent, v. Candace McLuckie, Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

Tax Returns Must Be Disclosed
Movant showed no prejudice in Circuit Court's erroneous refusal to require production of Respondent's tax returns because she did not show that the returns alone would have proven her case. Because Circuit Court found that Movant didn't meet her burden of proof, Circuit Court's failure to make a requested finding of fact on whether maintenance was modifiable or not was harmless.
In Re the Marriage of: Bradley Alan Mangus and Ronda Darlene Mangus. Bradley Alan Mangus, Petitioner/Respondent v. Ronda Darlene Mangus, Respondent/Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Burden of proof of stalking for order of protection. Thomas Schwalm, Respondent v. Lori Schwalm, Appellant, No. 87829 (Mo. App. E.D., March 20, 2007), Richter, P.J.
  This case is instructional to the extent it discusses the failure of proof that required the reversal of the judgment for an order of protection.
  Husband sought an order of protection where the evidence showed that wife knocked on husband's door multiple times, once blocked husband's vehicle in a parking lot, followed him to work on occasion and once approached him at a gas station. That sounds like stalking, except for one crucial element. “While the statutory definition of stalking requires alarm (in the victim), a plaintiff is required to do more than simply assert a bare answer of 'yes' when asked if he was alarmed. A plaintiff must show that a defendant's conduct caused him fear of danger of physical harm as stated in the statutory definition of alarm. See Section 455.010(10)(c).”
  Note: A similar case was just reported for the same proposition: Clark v. Wuebbeling, No. 88413 (Mo. App. E.D., March 20, 2007), opinion also by Judge Richter.

Identical twins yield identical paternity tests. State of Missouri, ex rel., Department of Social Services, Division of Child Support Enforcement, and Holly Marie Adams, Petitioners/Respondents v. Raymon Miller, Respondent/Appellant and Richard Miller, Respondent, No. 27188 (Mo. App. S.D., March 14, 2007), Garrison, J.
  This was a paternity action in which twin brothers were having sexual relations with the eventual mother of a child for whom child support was sought. The brother named as the father appealed on the basis that the burden of proof of his paternity was not met because of the results of DNA testing of both brothers. The results were identical.
  Held: Affirmed. When competing tests for paternity show two potential fathers, the court must look to the nongenetic evidence to determine if there is a preponderance of evidence of the identity of the father. Here, the mother's testimony established that appellant was the only one of the two who could be the father.

Disqualification of guardian ad litem in modification action. State of Missouri, ex rel. Larry Dreppard, Relator, v. Hon. Phillip Jones, Com., and Hon. John Essner, Respondents, No. 89214 (Mo. App. E.D., March 6, 2007), Norton, P.J.
  A motion to modify was filed and the trial court re-appointed the guardian ad litem (“GAL”) from the dissolution of marriage action. Within 10 days of that appointment, father asked for the disqualification of the GAL. The request was denied. Father now seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to grant the motion to disqualify.
  Held: Writ made absolute. Section 452.423.1, RSMo provides that each party has a right to one disqualification of an appointed GAL if requested in a timely manner (within 10 days of the appointment). The trial court viewed the motion to modify as a continuation of the original dissolution action. However, the opinion notes “… that by 're-appointing' the GAL following the motion to modify, the court recognized that the modification proceeding was independent from the original dissolution proceeding. Otherwise, no appointment would have been necessary.” Since the motion to modify is deemed by the rules to be an independent proceeding, the parties had a right to disqualify the GAL.

Pension benefits and disability payments. Sandra Ray Coffman, Respondent v. Elvin Cale Coffman, Appellant, No. 66204 (Mo. App. W.D., February 27, 2007), Ellis, J.
  In this dissolution of marriage action, the parties were married in 1982. At that time, husband had worked for General Motors for approximately 4 ½ years. He continued that employment until December 2002 for a total of 24 years. Earlier that year he had been admitted to a psychiatric hospital and his father was named as his guardian and conservator by the probate court. He was 45 years old as of his last day at General Motors. He had received disability payment from General Motors and eventually qualified for Social Security disability benefits, too. He qualified and was ultimately receiving disability benefits from General Motors. The trial court determined that all but the pre-marital years of credited service were marital property having been accumulated during the marriage. It was divided equally between the parties. Husband appealed.
  Held: Reversed. The court of appeals determined from the evidence that the only reason the husband had begun receiving benefit payments was because of his disability. Otherwise, he would not be eligible for pension benefits until reaching retirement age under the plan. Further, the terms of the General Motor benefits provided that husband would receive the disability payments based on his years of service until either he reached age 65 (retirement age) or became capable of gainful employment. After age 65 the benefits would revert to being pension benefits in character. Thus, the benefits he was and would later be eligible for were partially marital and non-marital in character. The opinion notes that disability benefits are not marital property “… if they serve as a substitute for earnings lost due to the recipient's inability to work. In re: Marriage of Thomas, 21 S.W.3d 168,173 (Mo. App. S.D. 2000).”
  The case was remanded for a determination of which portion of the marital portion of the benefits will be awarded between the parties and to award husband the non-marital portion thereof.

Order of protection between brothers-in-law. Terry Pratt, Respondent, v. Chuck Lasley, Appellant, No. 65992 (Mo. App. W.D., January 16, 2007), Ellis, J.
  The two parties are brothers-in-law because they are each married to women who are sisters. Respondent was found to have assaulted the Petitioner and an order of protection was entered. The Respondent appealed asserting that the definition of family member in the statute (§455.020.1) did not apply since there is no blood relation between them.
  Held: Affirmed. “Had the legislature intended to limit the statute's applicability to those 'of kin' or related by cosanguinity or direct affinity as proposed by (respondent), the legislature would have used those terms in the statute.
  “The plain and ordinary meaning of the phrase 'related by marriage' includes one's brother-in-law.”

Source for Post:  The Missouri Bar

• 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

Pension Was Marital And Non-Marital Property
Pension is a hybrid of marital and non-marital property; the former to the extent that it represents deferred payment of wages earned during the marriage, and the latter to the extent that it represents compensation for future wages lost due to disability. Remanded to Circuit Court to reconsider property and debt division, and maintenance awards.
Sandra Ray Coffman, Respondent v. Elvin Cale Coffman, Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

Separable Finality Did Not Apply
When a party to an action for dissolution of marriage dies, action continues if Circuit Court has already dissolved marriage "even though the order may be partial, interlocutory or not a final judgment resolving all issues in the case." But action abates if Circuit Court has not already made some order purporting to dissolve the marriage. Order nunc pro tunc cannot correct that omission.
Mary Ruth McMilian, Appellant, v. James Henry McMilian, Respondent. Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Conduct During Marriage Influences Judgment
Wife's inability to support herself due to health problems and lack of skills supports award of maintenance. Evidence of Wife's resources, from later hearing on attorney fees, is no basis for reversing Circuit Court's award of maintenance. Husband's use of resources, including extramarital affair, supports division of property and allocation of debt to him, and does not bar an award of attorney fees to Wife.
Pamela J. Russum, Respondent, v. Gerald E. Russum, Jr., Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

No Prejudice Need Be Shown On Departure From Statutes
Circuit Court accepted into evidence an amended social report from Children's Division to replace that filed originally with the petition. But Circuit Court never met with Juvenile Officer after filing of petition to assign report. Failure to strictly comply with statutes on termination of parental rights is reversible error, and "a parent facing termination bears [no] burden of establishing prejudice."
K.L.W., S.F.W., and L.S.W., In the Interest of. Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District

Source for Post:  The Missouri Bar

• 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

Evidence showing Husband's abuse and attempts to co-opt Child into abusive behaviors supported order of restricted and supervised visitation. Testimony against Husband was not biased, just unfavorable. Trial Court erred in classifying property as separate even though there was no evidence to rebut the presumption that the property was marital, but such error did not cause property division to be so unduly weighted in either party's favor as to constitute an abuse of discretion.

Entire opinion of this case can be read here

• 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

How to find property your spouse may be concealing when you divorce.

This list includes common ways in which a spouse may undervalue or disguise marital assets:

• Antiques, artwork, hobby equipment, gun collections, and tools that are overlooked or undervalued. Look for antique furnishings, original paintings, or collector-level carpets at the office.
• Income that is unreported on tax returns and financial statements.
• Cash kept in the form of travelers' checks. You may be able to find these by tracing bank account deposits and withdrawals.
• A custodial account set up in the name of a child, using the child's Social Security number.
• Investment in certificate "bearer" municipal bonds or Series EE Savings Bonds. These do not appear on account statements because they are not registered with the IRS. (The government is phasing out these bonds, realizing that it is losing a lot of money.)
• Collusion with an employer to delay bonuses, stock options, or raises until a time when the asset would be considered separate property.
• Debt repayment to a friend for a phony debt.
• Expenses paid for a girlfriend or boyfriend, such as gifts, travel, rent, or tuition for college or classes.
• Retirement accounts that your spouse never tells you about.

In addition, business owners may try to hide assets in these ways:

• Skimming cash from the business.
• Salary payments to a nonexistent employee, with checks that will be voided after the divorce.
• Money paid from the business to someone close -- such as a father, mother, girlfriend, or boyfriend -- for services that were never actually rendered (asuming the money is given back to your spouse after the divorce is final).
• A delay in signing long-term business contracts until after the divorce. Although this may seem like smart planning, if the intent is to lower the value of the business, it is considered hiding assets.

When you're looking for these items, you may have difficulty finding them or getting the proof you need to show they exist. Formal discovery procedures through litigation may help. For instance, you could take the deposition (legal interview) of your spouse's boss or payroll supervisor. But you may also need to hire a forensic accountant or a private investigator. (A forensic accountant is an accountant who is trained to look into accounting practices in order to gather evidence that can be used in court.) Usually an attorney can refer you to these specialists.

Document Your Finances Before Filing for Divorce

If you suspect that your spouse may attempt to hide assets, it's best to start investigating your household and business finances before initiating divorce proceedings. Make copies of important documents such as tax returns from the past several years, bank account statements, pay stubs, and any other documents that reflect joint assets or debts. Keep copies of these documents outside the home if you're still living with your spouse or partner.

Copyright © 2006 Nolo

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks