Free Newsletter
Domestic Relations — Equitable Distribution – Distributive Award – Ability to Pay – Appeals – Rules Violations
Anderson v. Anderson (Lawyers Weekly No. 15-16-0047, 12 pp.) (Rick Elmore, J.) Appealed from Surry County District Court (Charles Neaves Jr., J.) N.C. App. Unpub. Holding: The trial court ordered a distributive award without finding that the presumption in favor of an in-kind distribution had been rebutted; furthermore, the trial court failed to make findings […]
Domestic Relations – Equitable Distribution – Unequal Division – Distributive Award – Valuation
Peltzer v. Peltzer Even though the equitable distribution order does not explicitly state what percentage of the marital estate is distributed to which party, the unchallenged findings and a little math show that the defendant-husband was awarded 55 percent of the marital estate, rather than the 20 percent he claims to have been awarded.
Civil Practice – Appeals – Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Domestic Relations – Equitable Distribution – Distributive Award – Enforcement Pending Appeal
Romulus v. Romulus Where the trial court’s equitable distribution order required the defendant-husband to make a distributive award to the plaintiff-wife in monthly installments over seven years, once the husband appealed the order, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to enforce the payment of the installments. Vacated and remanded.
Domestic Relations – Equitable Distribution – Distributive Award – Ability to Pay – Interest
Smith v. Smith The trial court found that the plaintiff-husband had $176,000 equity in the marital home; moreover, the trial court distributed to the husband $33,662 in “liquid, non-tax-deferred assets.” Therefore, the trial court did not err in determining that the husband “has the ability to make the [$110,575] distributive award.”
Domestic Relations – Equitable Distribution – Separate Property – ‘Consideration’ — Distributive Award – Dairy Farm
Williams v. Williams Once the trial court found the “Mayberry Tract” to be the defendant-husband’s separate property, the trial court was not required - as argued by the plaintiff-wife — to value the Mayberry Tract for the purpose of considering it pursuant to G.S. § 50-20(c)(1). We affirm the trial court’s equitable distribution order.
Domestic Relations – Civil Practice – Contempt – Consent Order – Spousal & Child Support – Distributive Award – Personal Expenses
Raprager v. Raprager. Even though a modification of defendant's support obligations may be warranted based on the decline in his business revenue, by his profligate spending after the June 3, 2008, consent order and his failure to pay his obligations . . .
Top Legal News
- Catesha Hargro: Finding pathways forward
- Cooper vetoes bill over control of election boards
- Judge dismisses state lawmaker’s defamation suit
- 5th Circuit blocks Louisiana redistricting hearings
- Bonnie Keen: Charting her own course
- Courts’ work will continue amid government shutdown
- NC lawmakers to redraw district maps again
- Mississippi activists ask to join water lawsuit
- State judge blocks gender-affirming care ban
- Menendez pleads not guilty in wide-ranging corruption case
- Lawyer in Trump-Russia probe confirmed for Connecticut high court
- Commercial vehicle crash claims life of wife, mother: $3.99 million settlement
Commentary
- Amotion sees resurgence after almost a decade
- The flip side of generative AI in law and how to address it
- The fight for equal educational opportunity continues
- Court’s term was rough on big business
- Ex-president, bar association have made their choice
- Ruling sharpens boundaries in attorney-client privilege
- Lawyers Weekly debuts new and improved web experience
- US Supreme Court bites back at parody’s use of the First Amendment
- Supreme Court leaves key internet protection untouched
- Case study: North Carolina courts provide guidance on scope, limitations of attorney-client privilege
- A Different Ode to Pro Bono Work
- A roadmap to attracting, developing, retaining great associates
