Suppose you have filed a complaint requesting a domestic violence protective order against your partner, and before the return hearing required by law you decide that you want to dismiss the complaint. Victims of domestic violence sometimes dismiss claims out of fear of further harm or retaliation. Or they dismiss for other reasons: they decide to reconcile; they find themselves in an adverse financial position; they reconcile for the children; or they lack sufficient evidence to prosecute the claim. What type of dismissal should you enter if you are the victim and find you need to file the dismissal before the hearing? Continue reading →
As we proceed through the ongoing Coronavirus pandemic, domestic violence incidents have increased in North Carolina. Isolation and lockdown likely have exacerbated conditions that may have already been present in a rocky relationship. Financial woes and job losses have only added to the stress. Domestic violence and violence against intimate partners have been on the rise. Here, we will briefly discuss how the Court can grant emergency relief for the victims of domestic violence. Continue reading →
The Greensboro and High Point area is fortunate to be served by Family Service of the Piedmont, a local non-profit agency providing families and individuals affordable services in dealing with domestic violence, mental health, child abuse, and financial stability issues. Continue reading →
The ongoing coronavirus pandemic can add another disturbing statistic: domestic violence incidents have increased in North Carolina. Isolation and lockdowns likely have exacerbated conditions that may have been already present in a rocky relationship. Financial woes and job loss have only increased the stress. For some, these circumstances amounted to the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back. Continue reading →
One form of domestic violence occurring between current or former dating partners or spouses is intimate partner violence. Intimate partner violence (IPV), according to the CDC, affects one out of every four women and one out of every seven men. IPV includes psychological or emotional abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse, or stalking. Many victims of IPV experience sexual and/or physical violence or stalking before age 18. Continue reading →
October is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Although many find comfort and sanctuary within their own home, others do not because of physical violence by a partner. By U.S. Department of Justice estimates, approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men endure physical violence by the action of a partner every year. The National Domestic Violence Hotline is an outstanding resource for individuals to call for help and guidance if they are experiencing domestic abuse. Continue reading →
Doyle v. Doyle, 176 N.C. App. 547 (2006)
Sometimes, what kicks off a divorce is not a slow descent into a frustrating marriage, but instead a jarring and violent incident that cannot be reconciled. Domestic Violence Protective Orders (DVPO) can be granted to spouses that fear for their or their minor children’s safety. A DVPO plays a major role in a divorce case that includes claims for child custody. In North Carolina, our laws require that judges in child custody proceedings consider acts of domestic violence and safety of the child when making determinations. Is it fair for a judge in custody to allow new arguments for a settled case? Below, we discuss the implications of such a DVPO on child support through the lens of a legal doctrine called collateral estoppel.
(a) Facts: Plaintiff husband and Defendant wife married in 2001 and had one child together. They separated in 2003 and a complaint for child custody and support was filed in 2004. During this period, the parties alternated custody of the minor child on their own accord. On one such exchange, Plaintiff was at Defendant’s home to pick up the child when Defendant tried to prevent them leaving by trying to remove the child from Plaintiff’s arms. Defendant struck Plaintiff’s groin, and Plaintiff responded with his own use of force. Police were called and Defendant filed for a DVPO. Plaintiff filed a counterclaim for the same. Temporary custody was awarded to Defendant. In the DVPO hearing, the trial court Judge Mull found that Defendant had initiated the altercation, thus dismissing Defendant’s complaint and granting Plaintiff’s. In 2004, a hearing was conducted for the issues of child custody and support. At that hearing, trial court Judge Sigmon disagreed with Judge Mull, and ordered Defendant have primary physical custody. Plaintiff appealed.
The doctrine of collateral estoppel prevents courts from entering findings of facts or conclusions of law contrary to previous litigation. The issues must be the same. The issue must be raised and litigated. The issues must be material and relevant to the disposition of the prior action, and determination of the issues must be necessary and essential to the resulting judgment. Read on to see what happens when the trial court enters an order contrary to the previous findings of facts and the conclusions of law. Continue reading →
When a marriage ends, many former couples carry hurt, anger, grief, resentment, and hostility towards each other. Some former spouses cannot let go of these feelings even after the divorce. What happens to the children of these marriages when those feelings carry over into their post-separation lives? Continue reading →
Ogden v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 201988, 2019 WL 3162423 (2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were married in 1991 and divorced in 2011. The wife was granted Social Security disability benefits in 2008. She received $36,083 that year and $10,297 in 2010.
On their 2008 tax return, the parties did not report the wife’s benefits. On their 2010 return, the parties reported the benefits but did not pay the tax. Both returns were prepared by the husband. Continue reading →