|
|
|
Cases of Interest: Findings
© National Legal Research Group, Inc.
FLORIDA: Harreld v. Harreld, 682 So. 2d 635 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996).
Trial courts must make specific findings about the identity and value of all significant marital assets and liabilities, and must make specific findings that detail their reasons for distributing marital assets unequally.
Read More About This CaseIOWA: In re Marriage of Siglin, 555 N.W.2d 846 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996).
Trial courts should refrain from wholesale adoption of counsel's proposed findings and conclusions, but a separate standard of review does not apply on appeal from a decree prepared by counsel.
Read More About This CaseMISSOURI: Bullard v. Bullard, 969 S.W.2d 880 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).
Where the husband and wife were each awarded one-half of their total stocks, the trial court's failure to value the stocks did not make the property division unjust.
Read More About This CaseMISSOURI: In re Marriage of Eck, 904 S.W.2d 60 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).
The trial court's failure to designate property as marital or nonmarital was reversible error.
Read More About This CaseNEW YORK: Hilts v. Hilts, ___ A.D.2d ___, 669 N.Y.S.2d 720 (1998).
The husband could not complain about the trial court's failure to value specific items given his inadequate testimony about his finances.
Read More About This CaseTEXAS: Hill v. Hill, 971 S.W.2d 153 (Tex. App. 1998).
The trial court did not have to make additional valuation findings on numerous items of personalty because those findings would concern evidentiary, rather than ultimate or controlling, issues.
Read More About This CaseTEXAS: Rafferty v. Finstad, 903 S.W.2d 374 (Tex. Ct. App. 1995).
The characterization and the value of property are not ultimate issues and therefore need not be set out in findings of fact.
Read More About This CaseTEXAS: Tschirhart v. Tschirhart, 876 S.W.2d 507 (Tex. Ct. App.-Austin 1994).
Courts cannot take judicial notice of property values in a spouse's sworn inventory and appraisement submitted in a divorce action.
Read More About This CaseVIRGINIA: Stumbo v. Stumbo, 20 Va. App. 685, 460 S.E.2d 591 (1995).
The equitable distribution decree had to be reversed where the trial court had not made necessary findings to determine which assets and debts were marital and which were separate, the values thereof, and the rights and equities of the parties in the properties and debts.
Read More About This CaseGo to: Cases of Interest by Category
Go to: Previous Page
| Store Categories State Guidebooks Find Professionals Support Calculations |
Tax Aspects of Divorce:
| The Research Center: (Divorce Cases of Interest) | Research Home | ||||
Find Case Law, Case Analysis, and Divorce Information...
| |||||
Copyright© 1996-2010. All rights reserved by Divorce Source, Inc.
Comments & Suggestions? or Recommend This Page to a Friend!