North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog

Articles Tagged with Equitable Distribution

Published on:

By

READ V. READ, 2023-NCCOA-______ (2023) 

Imagine that you and your wife separate from each other. It is now 15 years later. While you have both moved forward in life, neither of you filed for divorce. You are still married. One day you get a notice in the mail. There was an outstanding loan that originated during the marriage, while you two were still together, that has not been paid and now the lenders are threatening some legal action. Is it too late to file for equitable distribution and have a court order that you both pay on the debt?  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

FOSTER V. FOSTER, 2023-NCCOA-______ (2023) 

  1. Facts: Plaintiff and Defendant married in 2014 and separated at the end of 2019. Plaintiff filed for custody and equitable distribution (ED). Defendant counterclaimed. A trial on ED was held in February and March of 2022. There, the trial court entered a judgment with a slight unequal division in Defendant’s favor. One item that classified as Plaintiff’s separate property was an account with funds sourced from a settlement Plaintiff received pursuant to the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA), and some items of personal property purchased with those funds. Defendant appealed.  

  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

When it comes to the division of marital property, one question we are commonly asked is what happens if the value of an asset, such as a home, increases during the pendency of the case? In North Carolina, there is a specific provision of the law addressing this exact scenario: divisible property. 

Divisible property is a term within North Carolina’s equitable distribution laws that relate to the distribution of assets and liabilities in a separation and divorce.   Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Achraf Hakimi is an unknown name to most Americans. However, in Europe and most of the world, he is famous as the starting right back for Paris Saint-Germain, one of the most famous soccer teams in the world, and he represented his home country, Morocco, in the latest World Cup. Needless to say, Mr. Hakimi is quite successful on the football pitch (soccer field) and has been rewarded handsomely for his talent. His contract at Paris-Saint Germain is rumored to be in the range of a million dollars a month. He’s had some legal issues recently; specifically he is under investigation by French authorities for an alleged rape. And even more recently, likely due to the underlying allegations, his wife has filed for divorce.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Dolan v. Dolan, 148 N.C. App. 256 (2002). 

  1. Facts: Plaintiff and Defendant married in 1971. Plaintiff went to optometry school and eventually he started his own practice and also bought rental properties to supplement the family income. The parties separated in 1994. A claim for Equitable Distribution (ED) was brought in a counterclaim by the Defendant. For ED, the parties entered into certain stipulations. They stipulated to the values of the rental properties. There were some contentions in the proposed order. However, the Judge signed an Order, which found that Plaintiff would incur certain amounts for taxes for the “liquidation” of rental properties distributed to him, if he decided to do so. The Order also found that Defendant would incur taxes for the liquidation of the rental properties distributed to her, if she decided to do so. Defendant appeals. 

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

DONATI V. DONATI, 2023-NCCOA-________ (2023) (unpublished). 

  1. Facts: Husband and Wife separated and a claim for equitable distribution was filed by Husband, who claimed that he ought to receive more than fifty percent of all marital and divisible property. Husband contended that he sold his separate residence, a house owned before the marriage, and then put about $60,000 of those proceeds into the marital home. The trial court found that an in-kind distribution was equitable, and that an equal division was not. Husband appealed and argued that he was entitled to the return or reimbursement or credit for the $60,000 that he claims was his separate contribution to the marital property. 

  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Becker Williams, F. Supp. 3d     , 2016 WL 878492 (W.D. Wash. 2016)

Facts: Husband and wife were married and in 2002, the husband designated the wife as survivor beneficiary of his retirement plans with Xerox. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Suppose you inherit money from a family member during your marriage. Is your inheritance subject to being divided under North Carolina’s equitable distribution statute? The brief answer: it depends.

North Carolina General Statute § 50-20 defines marital property as all real and personal property obtained and currently owned by either or both spouses during the marriage and before the date of separation unless that property is determined to be separate or divisible property. Separate property under N.C.G.S. §50-20 is real and personal property acquired by a spouse before or during the marriage through devise, descent, or gift. Applying the definitions of marital and separate property from N.C.G.S. § 50-20, any money or property you inherit from a family member would be separate property. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Let’s suppose that you provided funds, checks, cash, or other payments to your ex since separation. You have a claim pending for equitable distribution, which seeks to divide your marital property. But court is slow and it can take some time for the court to reach your case. When it does, how should the court treat those payments you made? Were they gifts, or were they something the court ought to consider in equitable distribution? Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Hicks v. Hicks, 2022-NCCOA-139.

Facts: Plaintiff and Defendant attended a mediation to attempt to settle the Equitable Distribution and alimony parts of their case. In mediation, they reached a settlement and memorialized their terms in a consent order, entered in September of 2018. Among those terms, Defendant received a parcel of land with a requirement to refinance the loan to remove Plaintiff’s name and debt. Defendant also received another parcel of land, with a similar refinance provision. Finally, the consent order provided that Plaintiff shall pay a distributive award to Defendant for $87,500, on or before January 1, 2019. Defendant was having difficulty refinancing the loans on the parcels he received. Plaintiff’s counsel reached out the Defendant’s new counsel to discuss the issue of the loans, but then noticed that “Plaintiff” and “Defendant” on the distributive award provision were interchanged (the parties agreed that Plaintiff would be receiving the award). Plaintiff thus filed a Rule 60 motion on April 15, 2020, requesting that the court correct a clerical mistake under 60(a) or such other justifiable relief under 60(b)(6). Plaintiff and her attorney testified that it was the mutual agreement that Plaintiff receive the award, and Defendant pay it. The trial court granted relief under 60(b)(6) and amended the typo. Defendant appeals. Continue reading →