The DC Court of Appeals in ANGULO v. GOCHNAUER, deconstructed a divorce property settlement agreement as it related to the Foreign Service Act. Parties in advance of divorce, had reached a property settlement agreement that in general terms released one another from any future property claims with no specific mention of the statutory provisions of the Foreign Service Act. Specifically, parties had incorporated in a general release clause of the property settlement agreement that they desired: to settle all rights, interests and obligations between them and to obtain a full, complete and final property settlement and agreement, including a settlement
Read More
WASHINGTON DC DIVORCE RESOUCES
RESOURCES: DISSIPATED AND SPENT MARTIAL PROPERTY STILL SUBJECT TO EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS COMMINGLED PROPERTY DEEMED TO BE A MARITAL PROPERTY EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY AFTER SEPARATION: WASHINGTON DC DIVORCE DIVISION OF PROPERTY AND RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT: DC DIVORCE DC DIVORCE DURING THE PANDEMIC : ABC7 INTERVIEW ENFORCEABILITY OF THE DC DIVORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS GRANT OF ATTORNEY’S FEES IN DC DIVORCE ACTION — DECONSTRUCTED DC DIVORCE RESIDENCY REQUIRMENTS DC DIVORCE NOTICE OF APPEAL & APPELLATE PROCEDURE DC DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP V. MARRIAGE WASHINGTON DC DIVORCE & SEPARATION DURING THE PANDEMIC LEGAL CRITERIA FOR PENDENTE LITE ALIMONY SAME SEX COMMON LAW MARRIAGE AND
Read More
RIGHT TO TESTIFY | SELF DEFENSE
The DC Court of Appeals in Graves v. U.S., decided on February 25, 2021, addressed and analyzed the constitutional requirements of asserting a self-defense claim and the right to testify unhindered. Graves was arrested for theft and assault on a police officer as he attempted to leave a liquor store with a bottle unpaid. Defendant argued at trial that the officer had used excessive force in putting him on a choke hold and his fighting back was justified as self-defense to the excessive use of force. During trial, after reviewing the video footage, the trial Judge sue sponte: Foreclosed any
Read More
AWARD OF LEGAL FEES IN CIVIL PROTECTION ORDER (CPO) CASES: LOWER STANDARD
The Court of Appeals in Cave v. Scheulov, addressed and defined parameters in awarding attorney’s fees in Civil Protection Order (CPO) cases. Specifically, Cave had filed a Petition for a CPO against her husband of thirteen years alleging physical abuse and assault, which was granted by the court. Her claim for legal fees however was denied as the trial court had required that she first prove that the litigation was oppressive, burdensome or in bath faith as a condition precedent to awarding legal fees or before considering all other elements and factors. Traditionally and particularly in divorce cases, the court has
Read More
INTERSECTION OF DIVORCE, CHILD CUSTODY AND NEGLECT PETITION
The DC Court of Appeals in K.H. v. R.H., considered application of a complex legal standard while reconciling a divorce, neglect as well as third party custody filing. Mr. H. and Mrs. H. were divorced and under the terms of their divorce decree, Mrs. H. was granted custody of their minor children. Subsequent to the divorce, and while Mrs. H. was involved in another relationship, a neglect proceeding was brought against her and she was adjudicated neglectful. Mr. H. thereafter initiated a third-party custody filing to gain custody of the child who was deemed neglected. It is noteworthy that Mr.
Read More
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY | MUST BE EQUITABLY ASSESSED
The Court of Appeals in Murphy v. Murphy, defined what constitutes an equitable distributing of property that is changing in value. The appellant had argued that the trial court had not property and timely assessed the value of the martial home before issuing a distribution order and during a divorce proceeding, namely that: A steep decline in value of the marital property before the court’s order of disposition prevented the distribution from being “equitable, just, and reasonable” as required by statute, The trial court erred in making its property distribution by failing to credit appellant for his mortgage payments, and
Read More
INCONVENIENT DIVORCE: FORUM NON CONVENIENS
The DC Court of Appeals in Davis v. Davis, explained and expounded on the doctrine of forum non conveniens in conjunction with a divorce action. Appellant Mr. Davis, filed for divorce in the District after meeting only the six months residency requirement all while his wife, child as well as all of their joint properties were located in Mississippi. Davis sought only a divorce decree without adjudication of property or distribution and argued that the DC divorce statute allows for issuance of a final decree without any disposition of marital property. Ms. Davis opposed the DC divorce petition arguing: She
Read More
DEPRESSION & AWARD OF ALIMONY
The DC Court of Appeals in Lake v. Lake, focused on two specific elements in award of alimony dispute: The metal health influence over earning capacity, and The expected future investment income. Generally, the trial court has sole discretion in awarding alimony and as such balances, inter alia, the following elements among parties in awarding alimony to one side or the other: The duration of the marriage, The ages and health of the parties, Their respective financial positions, both past and prospective, Property ownership, The needs of the requesting spouse and the other spouse’s ability to contribute thereto, and The
Read More
CIVIL PROTECTION ORDERS & MARTIAL PROPERTY
The Court of Appeals in Araya v. Keleta, expanded the meaning of the marital property in the context of Civil Protection Orders and related filings. In the case, wife-Keleta had filed a petition against husband-Araya alleging physical abuse and requesting a stay away order from the husband and from the marital home, which the trial court granted. On Appeal, Araya argued that as the home in question was not in fact a martial property, the judicial officer was precluded from ordering him to stay away from such dwelling. In short, the judicial officer had no authority to preclude him from
Read More
ALIMONY & CHILD SUPPORT: IMPUTED INCOME: DIVORCE
The DC Court of Appeals in Saxon v. Zirkle, imputed income during the divorce proceedings for voluntary unemployment. Specifically, the trial court had granted parties absolute divorce while denying Ms. Saxon’s request for alimony and instead imputed income on her for unemployment, awarded the parties joint legal custody of their child, as well as modified Mr. Zirkle’s child-support obligations based on the imputed income. On appeal, Saxon challenged to the trial court’s decision to impute $24,000 in income to her in determining alimony and child support calculations. The issue of imputation of income arose during the alimony proceedings. Based on
Read More
- «Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- …
- 27
- Next Page»
