Articles Tagged with family lawyer

Published on:

Defendant Mother appeals from the trial court’s order on child support and custody.  The Court of Appeals reverses and remands.

Plaintiff Father and Defendant Mother married on January 1, 1994.  The parties had two sons and separated on May 10, 1997.  The parties’ divorce judgment was filed on August 17, 1998, which incorporated their separation agreement.  The separation agreement provided a custodial schedule that directed the parties’ two sons to reside primarily with Defendant Mother and to spend every other weekend and summer vacation with Plaintiff Father.  The agreement further provided that Plaintiff Father would pay half of the children’s uninsured medical and dental expenses and $200.00 each month as additional child support. Continue reading →

Published on:

Last post, we wrote about some cursory copyright issues regarding non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Today, we are going to dive into what happens when NFTs are part of a divorce. While divorce itself is nothing uncommon or new, the NFT craze and how they will be split up is surely uncharted territory for the courts. Continue reading →

Published on:

Morris v. Powell, 840 S.E.2d 223, 269 N.C.App. 496 (N.C. App. 2020):

North Carolina has very recently decided a case of first impression regarding “de facto emancipation.” Emancipation is typically one of the listed termination events for child support. This is when a child, who has not yet attained the age of majority, petitions the court to be independent and free from parental control. Our statutes allow anyone who is 16 years of age or older to petition the court for a judicial decree of emancipation, if they have been a resident for at least six months in the same county in North Carolina. Continue reading →

Published on:

HIRSCHLER V. HIRSCHLER, 2021-NCCOA-690 (2021).

Plaintiff and Defendant were awarded joint custody of their minor child. Plaintiff had primary physical custody, and Defendant was given extended summer visitation from June 1 to July 10 for each calendar year. Important to note, Plaintiff resided in North Carolina, while Defendant lived in Florida. Both parties agreed to deviate from the normal schedule so that Defendant would have the child from May 29 through July 8. Continue reading →

Published on:

Ex-football star Clinton Portis is in hot water for non-payment of child support. Portis was a second-round pick by the Denver Broncos back in 2002, then was traded to Washington.  He is also a two-time Pro Bowler whose NFL earnings exceeded $43 million during his career until he retired in 2012.  Despite this, Portis filed for bankruptcy in 2015, claiming mismanagement of funds by his financial advisors. Continue reading →

Published on:

Argueta v. Baker, 137 A.D.3d 1020, 27 N.Y.S.3d 237 (2016)

There are times where parents do not effectively co-parent. There are even times where one parent goes out of their way to interfere in the parent-child relationship with the other parent. There are ways to enforce the controlling custody order, such as contempt. But New York seems to also have another avenue of relief, asking the court to terminate child support. Note: this is not North Carolina law, it is from New York. Continue reading →

Published on:

Harris v. Harris, 352 S.E.2d 869, 84 N.C.App. 353 (N.C. App. 1987)

In the case above, the plaintiff was ordered to pay to defendant an Equitable Distribution (ED) distributive award in the amount of $23,706.82, but payment of the award was postponed until the parties’ youngest child reached age 18 or graduated from high school. The Court of Appeals reversed because, at the time, such a postponement would have extended the distributive award to seven years after the termination of the marriage. This was significant, as the court is not to order a distributive award that would be paid “over such an extended time period that the payment thereof will be treated by the Internal Revenue Service as ordinary income.” Here, the courts look to IRS regulations to prevent taxes on the transfer of property incident to divorce, and IRS rules say gains or losses that result from transfers are not treated as ordinary income if they relate to the cessation of the marriage. However, if a transfer occurs more than six years after the termination of the marriage, one presumes it is not related to the cessation of the marriage. 26 CFR § 1.1041-1T.  That would be rebuttable but involves more work. Continue reading →

Published on:

In our last post, we wrote and talked about the basics of non-fungible tokens, or NFTs. They have some value on the market, and when things have value there will be a fight. When I first heard that a Nyan cat NFT sold for hundreds of thousands, and then when a simple picture of a Shiba Inu dog (the image at the heart of the the memecoin dogecoin and, predating that, just the general doge meme) also sold for a bunch of money, I began to wonder how copyright worked in this new NFT realm. Clearly, there was an artist that created the Nyan cat gif/meme/video, just like there would be a dog owner and photographer for the Shiba. Who should be getting paid from the sale of the associated NFTs? Continue reading →

Published on:

December 30th is National Bacon Day. I assume it is a day to glorify and celebrate the many epicurean triumphs that bacon has brought to our society. Well, bah humbug. I for one, shall not be celebrating such a day. Continue reading →

Published on:

Clark v. Clark and Barrett, 2021-NCCOA-653 (2021)

  • Facts: The Clarks were a married couple in North Carolina. In 2016, Husband began an affair with Ms. Barrett, in Virginia. That same year while home in North Carolina, Wife discovered text messages between Husband and Barrett. Husband finally left the marital home after Wife threatened to call Barrett and ask about the affair. Husband’s intimate relationship with Barrett went as far as conceiving a child with Barrett via in vitro fertilization. Things became contentious. In March of 2018, Wife began to interact with Husband on a social network named Kik, wherein Husband was using an alias. Husband, using the alias, sent a message to Wife containing a topless photo of Wife, and saying that this photo was being circulated in internet chat rooms. In May, Wife discovered the same photo on a Facebook “weight loss” advertisement, but with the nipples censored. Wife sued Husband for violating the revenge porn statute, NCGS 14-190.5A. Husband was found to have violated the statute. He appealed.

Continue reading →