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: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

IOWA: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

MISSOURI: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

MISSOURI: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

NEW 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

TEXAS: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

TEXAS: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

TEXAS: 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.
SubscriptionRead More About This Case

VIRGINIA: 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.
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.