Faust v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2019 105, 2019 WL 3938725 (2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced in Virginia. The wife was a victim of spousal abuse during the marriage. She was Hispanic; English was not her first language. Continue reading →
Siegel v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2019 11, 2019 WL 643186 (2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced in New York. The final decree ordered the husband to pay to the wife spousal maintenance of $10,110 per month. The husband failed to pay, and the wife filed enforcement proceedings. The court found the husband in contempt and threatened to imprison him unless he paid $225,000 to the wife.
The husband paid the sum required and then deducted it as alimony on his 2012 tax return. The IRS assessed a deficiency on the basis that the $225,000 was not alimony, and the husband appealed to the Tax Court. Continue reading →
So, you have these sexual images of your ex in North Carolina that you think will embarrass him, but you should think twice before posting them on Facebook or publishing them anywhere else. Publication of naked pictures or other private images of a person without consent not only can subject you to serious civil action but also is a criminal act. NCGS Section 14-190.5A. You cannot transfer, publish, distribute, or reproduce sexual images of your ex. Further, you cannot use these images in any manner. Continue reading →
Domestic abuse is a serious matter, and one not to be taken lightly. Sometimes, it is almost unimaginable. Mystery abounds. Why does one person hurt someone they love? And, moreover, why does someone who is hurt stay with the abuser? There are four types of abuse: physical, sexual, emotional/psychological, and neglect. The cycle of violence is a repetition of the following: 1) tension building; 2) acute violence; 3) reconciliation/honeymoon; 4) calm. And then, it starts over. In Guilford County, North Carolina, one can start with Family Service of the Piedmont or the Justice Center, both in downtown Greensboro. Continue reading →
(a) Facts: A woman lived with a man in California. The couple was not married. The man had a child by a prior relationship, and the child had two minor children. The man was, therefore, the children’s biological grandfather.
(a) Facts: A husband and wife divorced in 2006. The decree permitted the husband to take the dependency exemption for the child in odd-numbered years provided that he paid all court-ordered support.
(a) Facts: The parties were divorced in 2006. The divorce decree, which incorporated a separation agreement, ordered the husband to maintain any employer-provided life insurance policies for the benefit of the parties’ daughter until her emancipation.
(a) Facts: The parties were divorced in Delaware in 1995. The trial court divided the husband’s pension and ordered the wife to prepare a DRO. No DRO was ever signed.
(a) Facts: A husband divorced in Utah. A Utah state court entered at least two DROs dividing retirement benefits, each time reserving jurisdiction to amend the order in the future. The plan qualified the DROs.
Kirkpatrick v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2018-20, 2018 WL 1040955 (2018)
(a) Facts: The wife sued the husband for divorce in Maryland. A Maryland court issued a pendente lite order, providing for temporary support. In addition, the order required the husband to “transfer to Ms. Kirkpatrick the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) directly (and in a non‑taxable transaction) into an IRA appropriately titled in Ms. Kirkpatrick’s name” and to “pay to the Plaintiff a lump sum of Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00) . . . for Pendente Lite Attorney’s Fees and Suit Money.” 2018 WL 1040955, at *4. The parties were eventually divorced.
North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog