Navigation Bar
< Home Page[About Us]


Why?
Subsription Access to some research documents (those we license from independent legal research companies) are restricted to subscribers. To gain access to ALL of these documents, you must subscribe. If you are already a subscriber, you may sign in before you begin your research. (Why Subscribe?)

Cases of Interest: Children
National Legal Research Group, Inc.

ARKANSAS: Bishop v. Bishop, ___ Ark. App. ___, 961 S.W.2d 770 (1998).
The husband made a valid gift to the son of a certificate of deposit, so the account was not marital property. Parents frequently establish accounts for their children and then fight over the classification of the money when their marriage ends. Williams v. Williams and Bishop v. Bishop both support the view that an account in the name of a child is not marital property.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

INDIANA: In re Marriage of Hendricks, 681 N.E.2d 777 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997).
Stock which was the subject of an irrevocable gift by the wife to the parties' son under the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act was not marital property, and the wife's share of marital property did not have to be charged with the amount of marital funds which she used to acquire the stock for the son.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

IOWA: In re Marriage of Driscoll, 563 N.W.2d 640 (Iowa Ct. App. 1997).
The child support received by the wife for her children from a previous marriage was her nonmarital property because it was not the product of the parties' joint efforts.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

MAINE: Williams v. Williams, 706 A.2d 1038 (Me. 1998).
Funds in a savings account in the name of the parties' minor child could not be classified as marital property.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

MASSACHUSETTS: Johnson v. Johnson, 425 Mass. 693, 682 N.E.2d 865 (1997).
The trial judge in a divorce proceeding does not have authority to assign property to a third party, even to children of the marriage.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

MINNESOTA: Kriesel v. Gustafson, 513 N.W.2d 9 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994).
A parent's right to claim the couple's dependent children as an income tax exemption is not "property" with a present value for purposes of dividing the marital estate.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

MISSOURI: Weiss v. Weiss, 954 S.W.2d 456 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).
Bank accounts established with marital funds and held by divorcing spouses in custody for children are marital property absent evidence that the accounts were established as custodial accounts under the Uniform Gift to Minors Act.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

NEVADA: Shydler v. Shydler, ___ Nev. ___, 954 P.2d 37 (1998).
The trial court exceeded its authority by exempting toy soldiers, books, and other military collectibles from the marital estate and awarding them to the husband to be held in trust for the couple's son.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

NORTH CAROLINA: Crisp v. Crisp, ___ N.C. App. ___, 486 S.E.2d 485 (1997).
Medical expenses incurred by the husband for his daughter from a previous marriage were his separate debts, not marital debts.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

TENNESSEE: Hansel v. Hansel, 939 S.W.2d 110 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996) (released 1997).
Certificates of deposit which were acquired with marital property in the name of the husband and his daughter from another marriage were not proven to be gifts to the daughter so as to be excluded from the marital estate.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

TEXAS: Hunt v. Hunt, 952 S.W.2d 564 (Tex. App. 1997).
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to reimburse the community estate for child support payments made by the husband during the marriage.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

Go to: Cases of Interest by Category
Go to: Previous Page


State Home Archives Bulletin Menu Chat Rooms Family Law Links Publications Menu Dictionary


About Us | Monthly Newsletter | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Statement | Contact Us | Advertising

The information contained on this page is not to be considered legal advice. A lawyer should always be consulted in regards to any legal matters. Divorce Source, Inc. is also not a referral service and does not endorse or recommend any third party individuals, companies, and/or services. Divorce Source, Inc. has made no judgment as to the qualifications, expertise or credentials of any participating professionals. Read our Terms & Conditions.

© 1996 - 2012 Divorce Source, Inc. All Rights Reserved.