In Sudderth v. Sudderth, the DC Court of Appeals addressed whether it was appropriate to award property in lieu of alimony. On appeal, Mrs. Sudderth’s claimed that the trial court had erred in distributing marital property in lieu of alimony without first calculating the amount and duration of alimony to be distributed. In short, the Court of Appeals held that there are no restraints on the trial court’s ability to award marital property in lieu of alimony, and also it is not an abuse of discretion when a trial court denies a request for alimony and yet awards marital property. Thus,
Read More
DISSIPATED AND SPENT MARTIAL PROPERTY STILL SUBJECT TO EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS
The Court of Appeals in Herron v. Johnson, expounded on the equitable distribution of marital property that has been dissipated. Dissipation of martial property is generally defined as where one spouse uses marital property for his own benefit and for a purpose unrelated to the marriage at a time when the marriage is undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown. Here, the trial court had determined that the pension funds accumulated during the marriage and used by one spouse and spent and dissipated during the marriage is no longer a property for the court to factor in with regards to the equitable distribution
Read More
COMMINGLED PROPERTY DEEMED TO BE A MARITAL PROPERTY
The Court of Appeals in Araya v. Keleta, specifically addressed the issue of commingled property during the marriage as well as addressing child custody, support and alimony. After a five-year marriage, husband filed for divorce seeking physical custody of their three children as well as seeking distribution of marital assets and dispensing of alimony. The trial court after extensive litigation awarded physical custody to the mother with the father having a visitation schedule, as well as distributing the marital home in its entirety to the wife and awarding significant alimony and child support to the wife. The Court of Appeals
Read More
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY AFTER SEPARATION: LEGAL CRITERIA
The DC Court of Appeals in Gail v. Sherman, specifically addressed division of property created after separation and the formula used by the court to equitably distribute such property. Sherman had appealed the trial court decision granting her a sum of $40,000 for her equitable portion of the value of AutoBody that her husband Sherman had created after the couple had separated. Factually, parties had a business jointly owned and operated during their marriage called FuelLine and after separation both had agreed and via an agreement to bring that business to closure. Sherman thereafter started a new similar business referred
Read More
DIVISION OF PROPERTY AND RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT: DIVORCE
The DC Court of Appeals in ABULQASIM v. MAHMOUD, reviewed the lower court decision pertaining to appellant’s claim that the trial court: Lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the matter because neither party had been a bona fide resident of the District of Columbia for at least six months prior to appellant’s filing of the divorce action; Abused discretion in admitting hearsay testimony regarding an email, not introduced into evidence, that alleged appellant was having an extramarital affair; and Erred in including a number of items appellant asserts were his separate property in the distribution of marital property. Factually, appellant Abulqsim sought
Read More
DC DIVORCE DURING THE PANDEMIC : ABC7 INTERVIEW
Divorce during COVID: D.C. attorneys see uptick in cases of couples wanting to separate by Daniel Miller, ABC7 Saturday, October 17th 2020 AA FILE PHOTO: The D.C. area has seen a rise in divorce cases during COVID-19 as local attorneys share their legal expertise on factors that lead couples to opt for separation. (Photo by Matt Cardy/Getty Images) WASHINGTON (ABC7) — The COVID-19 pandemic has placed a tremendous amount of stress on married couples in the D.C. area as they attempt to adapt to this new normal. Isolation, stress, and balancing work, finances, and family has become so overwhelming for some that
Read More
INTENT TO ASSAULT STATUTE DECONSTRUCTED: DC COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
The Court of Appeals in Powell v. U.S., decided on October 1, 2020, deconstructed the intent-to-frighten assault statute in reversing the appellant’s conviction. Factually, the appellant has kicked a moving police car and had approached the police officer generally in a menacing manner. The trial court held: the appellant displayed kind of intimidating approach, had a hostile look to her as she approached the Officers and while the defendant was not an exaggerated threat — under the totality of the circumstances she was reasonably threatening and the Officers were reasonably afraid under all those circumstances. In order to prove intent-to-frighten
Read More
WASHINGTON DC DIVORCE-CUSTODY-NEGLECT STATUTES; DC COURT OF APPEALS
The Court of Appeals in T.S. v. M.C.S., provided a unique interplay between the Washington DC Divorce, Custody and the Neglect Statutes. The mother T.S., appealed an order entered in a divorce proceeding permanently removing her two children from her custody and awarding permanent custody to the children’s maternal grandmother. The mother essentially claimed that the trial judge exceeded her authority under the District’s divorce statute by overlooking the biological parents and placing the children’s custody in a third-party grandmother. Procedurally, the father had filed for separation and eventually divorce while also alleging failure to protect by the mother and
Read More
VALIDITY OF THE PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENTS
The Court of Appeals in Burtoff v. Burtoff, still remains instructional as to how the Court would scrutinize validity of a prenuptial agreement in litigation. There, Mrs. Burtoff challenged the validity of the prenuptial agreement particularity provisions pertaining to spousal support in an event of separation and divorce. The Court again iterated that prenuptial agreements are generally considered contracts with their enforcement taking on the same criteria as other contracts but with a higher degree of scrutiny to ensure fairness, and balance. Specifically, the Court expounded in holding such contracts valid that with divorce such a commonplace fact of life,
Read More
WEIGHTY CONSIDERATION IN COMPETING ADOPTION CASES: RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
The Court of Appeals in IN RE PETITION OF J.B.S. & V.S.S.; IN RE PETITION OF R.H., decided on September 10, 2020, reversed the lower court giving “weighty consideration” to parental choice in a competing adoption litigation. Generally, the weighty consideration doctrine requires a court deciding between competing adoption petitions to grant the petition that the child’s biological parent favors unless the court finds “by clear and convincing evidence that the parent’s choice of custodian is clearly contrary to the child’s best interest. That is, the weighty consideration establishes a strong presumption that the parent’s preference is in the child’s
Read More