Hockin v. United States, ___ F. Supp. ___, 2019 WL 3845380 (D. Or. 2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife married in 1997. The IRS received from the parties’ joint tax returns for tax year 2007 and 2008. Tax was due for both years.
The wife made several payments then sought innocent spouse relief, including a refund. The IRS granted relief from 2008 on the ground that the wife’s signature on the 2008 return was a forgery. The IRS denied relief for 2007. Continue reading →
Chandler v. United States, 338 F. Supp. 3d 592 (N.D. Tex. 2018)
(a) Facts: Wife filed a petition for innocent spouse relief. The IRS denied the petition. The wife did not seek review in the Tax Court within the 90-day review period. The wife then filed an action in federal District Court seeking a refund of funds seized by the IRS. Continue reading →
Demar v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 201991, 2019 WL 3244301 (2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced. The divorce decree, which was a consent judgment, provided that the child would reside primarily with the wife. The husband was permitted to claim the child as a dependent for tax purposes in odd-numbered years but only if he was current on child support and the wife’s income was less than $15,000. “If these conditions were met, Ms. DeMar agreed to execute Form 8332 or a similar written declaration.” 2019 WL 3244301, at *1. Continue reading →
Skitzki v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2019106, 2019 WL 3946102 (2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced. The divorce decree gave the father custody two weekends each month, one weekday per week if the mother was in Ohio, and three (before age four) or four weeks in the summer. It described both parents as “residential parent and legal custodian.” The decree further stated that the father “shall take” the child as a dependent for tax purposes in even-numbered years. Continue reading →
Cook v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 201948, 2019 WL 2011087 (2019)
(a) Facts: An unmarried couple had a child. A New York court awarded custody to the mother. The order was silent on the tax exemption for the child. The parties orally agreed that the father could claim the exemption.
The father took the exemption. The IRS disallowed the exemption and assessed a deficiency. The husband appealed to the Tax Court. Continue reading →
In re Kiley, 595 B.R. 595 (Bankr. D. Utah 2018)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced in Utah. The divorce decree awarded the wife a lump-sum payment from the husband’s retirement plan and ordered that she be named as the plan’s survivor beneficiary.
The wife then declared bankruptcy. The trustee argued that the wife’s interests in the retirement plan was property of the estate, subject to division among the creditors. Continue reading →
Hoak v. Plan Adm’r of Plans of NCR Corp., 389 F. Supp. 3d 1234 (N.D. Ga. 2019)
(a) Facts: Two wives were divorced from their husbands. Both husbands were members of a senior executive retirement plan. The plan provided that survivor benefits would be paid to the “eligible spouse” of each plan participant. “Eligible spouse” was defined as “the spouse to whom the Participant is married on the date the Participant’s benefit payments under the Plan commence.” 389 F. Supp. 2d at 1278. Continue reading →
Schwartz v. Bogen, 913 F.3d 777 (8th Cir. 2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced in New Jersey in 1983. The divorce decree incorporated a settlement agreement. The agreement provided that if the wife remarried between 1986 and 1990, the husband would pay her, “as equitable distribution, a yearly sum equal to Twenty (20%) percent of [the husband’s]’s Basic Bell System Management Pension Plan.” 913 F.3d at 779. Since the divorce was in 1983, and the QDRO provisions were not added until 1984, no QDRO was ever obtained. Continue reading →
Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. McDonald, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, 2019 WL 2419659 (E.D. Mich. 2019)
(a) Facts: Husband wife were divorced in Florida. Their divorce decree incorporated a property settlement agreement providing that the husband would name the wife as beneficiary of his employer-provided life insurance.
Despite the agreement, the husband named his second wife as beneficiary of the policy. Upon his death, both wives claimed the proceeds, and the insurer filed an interpleader action in federal court.
Continue reading →
Culwick v. Wood, 384 F. Supp. 3d 328 (E.D.N.Y. 2019)
(a) Facts: Husband and wife were divorced. Their divorce decree incorporated a separation agreement. The agreement provided:
[T]he Husband shall otherwise retain all pensions and annuities acquired by him at any time, including during the term of the marriage. . . . The Wife waives any claims she might have in and to these benefits including the right to be named as a survivor beneficiary.
384 F. Supp. 3d at 335. The agreement further provided that “nothing herein contained shall require either party to renounce or disclaim any gift, devise or bequest which he or she may be given by the other’s Will, Trust, or other document.” Id. Continue reading →
North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog