North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog
Gebman v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2017‑184, 2017 WL 4158699 (2017)
(a) Facts: A husband and wife signed a joint tax return. The IRS assessed a deficiency. Both parties sought relief in the Tax Court.
Published on:
Sometimes it’s the Devil You Know… Innocent Spouse Relief.
Jacobsen v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2018‑115, 2018 WL 3598803 (2018)
(a) Facts: The husband worked 12-hour shifts 14 days per month as a machine operator at a factory. He also operated a home inspection business. The wife was employed as an accountant and also managed the finances of both the home inspection business and the family. The husband never reviewed bank or credit statements or otherwise examined the parties’ finances. “Petitioner relied on Ms. Lemmens to handle the family finances because of her training as an accountant.” 2018 WL 3598803, at *1.
Published on:
“No Good Deed Goes Unpunished” : Non-Marital Relationships and Qualifying Dependents
Sharp v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2017‑208, 2017 WL 4973234 (2017)
(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.
Published on:
Don’t Forget the Paperwork! : Dependency Exemptions
Seeliger v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2017‑175, 2017 WL 4012872 (2017)
(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.
Published on:
Looking Out for Our Kids: QDROs and Employer-Provided Life Insurance.
Sun Life Assur. Co. of Canada v. Jackson, 877 F.3d 698 (6th Cir. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 2624 (2018)
(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.
Published on:
Better Late Than Never…but Never Late Is Better; QDROs and Laches.
In re Beeghley, ___ Fed. App’x ___, 2018 WL 3060089 (3d Cir. 2018) (unpublished)
(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.
Published on:
“Return to Sender”
Stephens v. Alliant Techsystems Corp., 714 F. App’x 841 (10th Cir. 2017) (unpublished)
(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.
Published on:
Compliance is Key!
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.
Published on:
“Not for Profit”…Part 2
Lucas v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2018‑80, 2018 WL 2948427 (2018)
(a) Facts: The parties divorced in Florida in 2011. While the divorce was pending, the husband was in the process of liquidating his business, Vicis Capital, LLC. He received, while the action was pending, $4.7 million in distributions.
Published on:
“Not for Profit” … Part 1
Barry v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2017-237, 2017 WL 5899406 (2017)
(a) Facts: When the parties were divorced, the husband agreed to pay the wife $2,400 per month in alimony. Twenty-four years later, the husband filed an action against the wife in federal court for breach of contract, arguing that he had overpaid alimony and that the wife was required to return the overpayment. The action was dismissed quickly as time-barred.