|
|
|
Cases of Interest: Premarital Property
© National Legal Research Group, Inc.
ALASKA: Harrelson v. Harrelson, 932 P.2d 247 (Alaska 1997).
The trial court erred in finding that the parties were married for eight years, when in fact they were married for only the last three years of their relationship.
Read More About This CaseCOLORADO: In re Marriage of Renier, 854 P.2d 1382 (Colo. Ct. App. 1993).
Stock shares purchased during marriage with marital funds through options acquired before marriage were marital property. Additional shares husband acquired during marriage were also marital, since he failed to trace those shares to stock split of shares acquired before marriage.
Read More About This CaseFLORIDA: Anson v. Anson, 772 So. 2d 52 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000).
Was the husband's capital stock a marital asset, and was a retained earnings bookkeeping method the correct method to determine this?
Read More About This CaseILLINOIS: In re Marriage of Smith, ___ Ill. App. 3d ___, 638 N.E.2d 384 (1994).
The husband's self-serving testimony that he transferred his premarital stock into joint title only for convenience and not to make a gift did not overcome the presumption that property held in joint tenancy is marital property.
Read More About This CaseINDIANA: Cowden v. Cowden, 661 N.E.2d 894 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996).
Although business assets acquired by the husband before the marriage were part of the marital estate, the premarital origin of the business assets justified awarding him most of the marital estate.
Read More About This CaseKENTUCKY: Dotson v. Dotson, 864 S.W.2d 900 (Ky. 1993).
The trial court should not have granted the wife 85% of the marital estate simply because most of the marital property was derived from the nonmarital assets she brought to the marriage.
Read More About This CaseMAINE: Simoneau v. Simoneau, 693 A.2d 1135 (Me. 1997).
Property acquired by one party during premarital cohabitation is not marital property subject to equitable distribution.
Read More About This CaseNEW JERSEY: Pascale v. Pascale, 274 N.J. Super. 429, 644 A.2d 638 (App. Div. 1994).
By selling her premarital stock and using the proceeds for a down payment on the jointly titled marital home, the wife made an interspousal gift and did not retain a separate ownership interest in the proceeds from the sale of the stock.
Read More About This CaseNORTH CAROLINA: Minter v. Minter, 111 N.C. App. 321, 432 S.E.2d 720 (1993).
Although husband failed to show that his separate property was the source of currently owned assets, the trial court was obligated to consider husband's separate property contributions as a distributional factor.
Read More About This CaseSOUTH CAROLINA: Murray v. Murray, ___ S.C. ___, 439 S.E.2d 312 (Ct. App. 1993).
Home which husband paid for before the marriage was not transmuted to marital property merely because the parties lived there for the duration of their 17-year marriage.
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© 1996-2009. All rights reserved by Divorce Source, Inc.
Comments & Suggestions? or Recommend This Page to a Friend!