< Home Page [About Us] Why? 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: Virginia
© National Legal Research Group, Inc.

Agreements (full category)

VIRGINIA: Pelfrey v. Pelfrey, 25 Va. App. 239, 487 S.E.2d 281 (1997).
The parties' property settlement agreement was not the product of duress, where the agreement was executed nine months after the wife's suicide threats and at a time when the husband was living with another woman and was not under a doctor's care.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Nicholson v. Nicholson, ___ Va. App. ___, 463 S.E.2d 334 (1995).
The parties' property settlement agreement, in which the wife relinquished and released all rights in the husband's property, did not constitute an express waiver of her right to a share of his foreign service retirement annuity.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Hart v. Hart, ___ Va. App. ___, 497 S.E.2d 496 (1998).
The trial court could not include certain funds as part of the marital estate, where those funds had already been distributed according to the terms of the parties' separation agreement.
Read More About This Case

Appreciation of Assets (full category)

VIRGINIA: Martin v. Martin, ___ Va. App. ___, 489 S.E.2d 727 (1997).
Where the wife recognized that a home was undervalued and convinced the husband to invest his separate funds in it, she contributed "personal effort" for the purpose of determining how to classify the increase in value of the property.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Rowe v. Rowe, 24 Va. App. 123, 480 S.E.2d 760 (1997).
When classifying the increase in value of the husband's premarital stock in a family newspaper business, the trial court should consider the impact of passive economic factors and the efforts of the husband's brother as well as the extent to which the marital estate had already been adequately compensated for the husband's efforts.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Moran v. Moran, 29 Va. App. 408, 512 S.E.2d 834 (1999).
The husband should been awarded the passive increase in value on his premarital investment in his employer's defined contribution pension plan.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Hart v. Hart, 27 Va. App. 46, 497 S.E.2d 496 (1998).
Marital and nonmarital components of hybrid property may be apportioned in the same percentages as their respective contributions to the total equity in the property. The value of improvements, not their cost, should be considered when determining contributions.
Read More About This Case

Attorney's Fees (full category)

VIRGINIA: L.C.S. v. S.A.S., ___ Va. App. ___, 453 S.E.2d 580 (1995).
The husband's expenditure of marital funds for criminal defense fees did not constitute a dissipation of assets.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Taylor v. Taylor, 27 Va. App. 209, 497 S.E.2d 916 (1998).
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to the wife for two attorneys who provided complementary efforts in a complex case spanning multiple practice areas.
Read More About This Case

Bankruptcy (full category)

VIRGINIA: Bogart v. Bogart, 21 Va. App. 280, 464 S.E.2d 157 (1995).
The bankruptcy court had the authority to allow the state court to decide the validity of the parties' property settlement, even though the bankruptcy court itself had declined to approve the agreement.
Read More About This Case

Classification of Assets (full category)

VIRGINIA: Dietz v. Dietz, ___ Va. App. ___, 436 S.E.2d 463 (1993).
Property acquired by one spouse after the parties' last separation with wages earned after the last separation is separate property; the marriage is deemed to have ended, for purposes of classifying property, on the date of the last separation, in the absence of proof to the contrary.
Read 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.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Martin v. Martin, ___ Va. App. ___, 489 S.E.2d 727 (1997).
Where the wife recognized that a home was undervalued and convinced the husband to invest his separate funds in it, she contributed "personal effort" for the purpose of determining how to classify the increase in value of the property.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Hayes v. Hayes, 21 Va. App. 515, 465 S.E.2d 590 (1996).
Trial courts have authority under the equitable distribution statute to require payment of a nonmarital debt owed by one spouse to the other.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Luczkovich v. Luczkovich, 26 Va. App. 702, 496 S.E.2d 157 (1998).
The husband's severance pay was his separate property, where he negotiated and received the severance package two years after the parties' separation, and where the package was not compensation for services rendered during the marriage.
Read More About This Case

Closely Held Businesses (full category)

VIRGINIA: Rowe v. Rowe, 24 Va. App. 123, 480 S.E.2d 760 (1997).
When classifying the increase in value of the husband's premarital stock in a family newspaper business, the trial court should consider the impact of passive economic factors and the efforts of the husband's brother as well as the extent to which the marital estate had already been adequately compensated for the husband's efforts.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Gottlieb v. Gottlieb, ___ Va. App. ___, 448 S.E.2d 666 (1994).
Evidence supported the trial court's finding that the husband's business interests were transmuted to marital property by the wife's monetary and nonmonetary contributions during the marriage.
Read More About This Case

Comningled Assets (full category)

VIRGINIA: Holden v. Holden, __ Va. App. __, 520 S.E.2d 842 (1999).
The husband adequately retraced funds that came from the sale of separate property but were commingled with marital property.
Read More About This Case

Death of Spouse (full category)

VIRGINIA: Sprouse v. Griffin, ___ Va. ___, 458 S.E.2d 770 (1995).
When the husband died during the divorce proceeding, the trial court retained in rem jurisdiction to determine the ownership of escrowed proceeds from the sale of the parties' home.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Griffin v. Sprouse, ___ Va. App. ___, 448 S.E.2d 152 (1994).
After husband's death before entry of divorce, trial court in pending divorce action lacked jurisdiction to determine distribution of marital funds that parties' attorneys held in court-ordered escrow.
Read More About This Case

Debts (full category)

VIRGINIA: Kelker v. Schmidt, 34 Va. App. 129, 538 S.E.2d 342 (2000).
The trial court was not required to accept the commissioner's finding that two purported loans incurred by the wife to pay marital expenses during the marriage were marital debt to be divided.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Bogart v. Bogart, 21 Va. App. 280, 464 S.E.2d 157 (1995).
The bankruptcy court had the authority to allow the state court to decide the validity of the parties' property settlement, even though the bankruptcy court itself had declined to approve the agreement.
Read More About This Case

Disability Benefits (full category)

VIRGINIA: Asgari v. Asgari, ___ Va. App. ___, 533 S.E.2d 643 (2000).
The question before the court was whether the husband's state employee disability benefits constituted "retirement benefits" within the scope of the statutory definition of marital property.
Read More About This Case

Dissipation of Assets (full category)

VIRGINIA: L.C.S. v. S.A.S., ___ Va. App. ___, 453 S.E.2d 580 (1995).
The husband's expenditure of marital funds for criminal defense fees did not constitute a dissipation of assets.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Decker v. Decker, ___ Va. App. ___, 435 S.E.2d 407 (1993).
The husband did not engage in postseparation dissipation of marital assets by continuing his established practice of giving gifts to his family members, even though he discontinued the practice with regard to the wife's relatives once the couple separated.
Read More About This Case

Division of Property (full category)

VIRGINIA: Asgari v. Asgari, ___ Va. App. ___, 533 S.E.2d 643 (2000).
The question before the court was whether the husband's state employee disability benefits constituted "retirement benefits" within the scope of the statutory definition of marital property.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: McLellan v. McLellan, ___ Va. App. ___, 533 S.E.2d 635 (2000).
The wife was entitled to an award of a portion of the husband's military disability retirement pay, according to the terms of the separation agreement.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Theismann v. Theismann, 22 Va. App. 557, 471 S.E.2d 809 (1996).
The trial court was not plainly wrong in concluding that the husband intended to make a gift when he placed assets in joint title with the wife, and the decision to make a relatively equal distribution of the gifted property did not constitute an abuse of discretion despite the short duration of the marriage.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Lightburn v. Lightburn, 22 Va. App. 612, 472 S.E.2d 281 (1996).
The short duration of the parties' marriage did not justify awarding the wife one-half of the value of real property that the husband conveyed into a tenancy by the entirety two months before the parties' separation.
Read More About This Case

Double Dipping (full category)

VIRGINIA: Moreno v. Moreno, 24 Va. App. 190, 480 S.E.2d 702 (1997).
The income received by the husband from his share of the distribution of his pension could be considered as a resource when determining the amount of his spousal support obligation, and the wife's income from her share of the pension should be considered as a resource of hers in determining her need for support.
Read More About This Case

Evidence (full category)

VIRGINIA: Utsch v. Utsch, 28 Va. App. 450, 565 S.E.2d 345 (2002).
At an equitable distribution hearing, the husband argued that the marital residence had not been transmuted into marital property under Va. Code Ann. 20-107.3(A)(3)(d) because his separate portion of the property was retraceable and was not a gift. He asserted that the conveyance was accomplished without his intent to make a completed gift it was a mere transfer of title necessary to obtain a refinancing of the property.
Read More About This Case

Factors in Award (full category)

VIRGINIA: O'Loughlin v. O'Loughlin, 20 Va. App. 522, 458 S.E.2d 323 (1995).
When fault is relevant in arriving at an award, the trial judge must consider it objectively and consider how, if at all, it quantitatively affected the marital estate or the well-being of the family.
Read More About This Case

Findings (full category)

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.
Read More About This Case

Foreign Issues (full category)

VIRGINIA: Toomey v. Toomey, ___ Va. App. ___, 454 S.E.2d 735 (1995).
Ex parte divorce decree did not foreclose the wife from later seeking equitable distribution of her property right in the husband's military pension.
Read More About This Case

Gifts (full category)

VIRGINIA: Utsch v. Utsch, 28 Va. App. 450, 565 S.E.2d 345 (2002).
The parties were married in 1987. At the time of their marriage, the husband owned a residence that became the marital home. In 1988, the husband executed a deed of conveyance that transferred the property to himself and the wife as tenants by the entirety. The deed of gift provided that the conveyance was made for and in consideration of the love and affection of the husband and wife and was to be exempt from the recordation tax. The parties separated in 1998.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Theismann v. Theismann, 22 Va. App. 557, 471 S.E.2d 809 (1996).
The trial court was not plainly wrong in concluding that the husband intended to make a gift when he placed assets in joint title with the wife, and the decision to make a relatively equal distribution of the gifted property did not constitute an abuse of discretion despite the short duration of the marriage.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Lightburn v. Lightburn, 22 Va. App. 612, 472 S.E.2d 281 (1996).
The short duration of the parties' marriage did not justify awarding the wife one-half of the value of real property that the husband conveyed into a tenancy by the entirety two months before the parties' separation.
Read More About This Case

Goodwill (full category)

VIRGINIA: Howell v. Howell, ___ Va. App. ___, 523 S.E.2d 514 (2000).
Restrictive agreement that defined the value of the husband's partnership interest in a law firm did not control the existence of goodwill. The trial court could consider the money market fund established by the former husband after separation as marital property. The trial court could also require the husband to pay marital debt that increased after separation.
Read More About This Case

Joint Titling (full category)

VIRGINIA: Bchara v. Bchara, 38 Va. App. 302, 563 S.E.2d 398 (2002).
The mere fact that separate funds are conveyed into a joint account does not prevent the owner from tracing those funds to another source. The husband did not contribute significant efforts toward the increase in value of the wife's separate property by helping her to purchase the property at a more favorable price.
Read More About This Case

Marital Home (full category)

VIRGINIA: Martin v. Martin, ___ Va. App. ___, 489 S.E.2d 727 (1997).
Where the wife recognized that a home was undervalued and convinced the husband to invest his separate funds in it, she contributed "personal effort" for the purpose of determining how to classify the increase in value of the property.
Read More About This Case

Military Benefits (full category)

VIRGINIA: Irlbacher v. Irlbacher, No. 2083-00-4 (Va. Ct. App. Aug. 7, 2001).
The wife contended that the trial court erred in ordering that the wife's retroactive share of the husband's military retirement pay be based on the husband's "net" retirement pay rather than the "taxable income" portion of his retirement pay.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: McLellan v. McLellan, ___ Va. App. ___, 533 S.E.2d 635 (2000).
The wife was entitled to an award of a portion of the husband's military disability retirement pay, according to the terms of the separation agreement.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Bullis v. Bullis, 22 Va. App. 24, 467 S.E.2d 830 (1996).
An Arizona order modifying the parties' divorce decree and awarding the wife one-half of the community interest in the husband's disposable military retirement pay was entitled to full faith and credit in a proceeding to enforce the judgment in Virginia.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Nicholson v. Nicholson, ___ Va. App. ___, 463 S.E.2d 334 (1995).
The parties' property settlement agreement, in which the wife relinquished and released all rights in the husband's property, did not constitute an express waiver of her right to a share of his foreign service retirement annuity.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Toomey v. Toomey, ___ Va. App. ___, 454 S.E.2d 735 (1995).
Ex parte divorce decree did not foreclose the wife from later seeking equitable distribution of her property right in the husband's military pension.
Read More About This Case

Pensions (full category)

VIRGINIA: Torian v. Torian, 38 Va. App. 167, 562 S.E.2d 355 (2002).
A spouse who seeks the division of retirement benefits by an immediate offset bears the burden of introducing credible evidence of the present value of the benefits. Absent such evidence, the plan should be divided by deferred distribution.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Moreno v. Moreno, 24 Va. App. 190, 480 S.E.2d 702 (1997).
The income received by the husband from his share of the distribution of his pension could be considered as a resource when determining the amount of his spousal support obligation, and the wife's income from her share of the pension should be considered as a resource of hers in determining her need for support.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Nicholson v. Nicholson, ___ Va. App. ___, 463 S.E.2d 334 (1995).
The parties' property settlement agreement, in which the wife relinquished and released all rights in the husband's property, did not constitute an express waiver of her right to a share of his foreign service retirement annuity.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Moran v. Moran, 29 Va. App. 408, 512 S.E.2d 834 (1999).
The husband should been awarded the passive increase in value on his premarital investment in his employer's defined contribution pension plan.
Read More About This Case

Personal Injury Awards (full category)

VIRGINIA: Pelfrey v. Pelfrey, 25 Va. App. 239, 487 S.E.2d 281 (1997).
The parties' property settlement agreement was not the product of duress, where the agreement was executed nine months after the wife's suicide threats and at a time when the husband was living with another woman and was not under a doctor's care.
Read More About This Case

Postdecree Proceedings (full category)

VIRGINIA: Toomey v. Toomey, ___ Va. App. ___, 454 S.E.2d 735 (1995).
Ex parte divorce decree did not foreclose the wife from later seeking equitable distribution of her property right in the husband's military pension.
Read More About This Case

Separation (full category)

VIRGINIA: Dietz v. Dietz, ___ Va. App. ___, 436 S.E.2d 463 (1993).
Property acquired by one spouse after the parties' last separation with wages earned after the last separation is separate property; the marriage is deemed to have ended, for purposes of classifying property, on the date of the last separation, in the absence of proof to the contrary.
Read More About This Case

Severance Pay (full category)

VIRGINIA: Luczkovich v. Luczkovich, 26 Va. App. 702, 496 S.E.2d 157 (1998).
The husband's severance pay was his separate property, where he negotiated and received the severance package two years after the parties' separation, and where the package was not compensation for services rendered during the marriage.
Read More About This Case

Source of Funds (full category)

VIRGINIA: Hart v. Hart, 27 Va. App. 46, 497 S.E.2d 496 (1998).
Marital and nonmarital components of hybrid property may be apportioned in the same percentages as their respective contributions to the total equity in the property. The value of improvements, not their cost, should be considered when determining contributions.
Read More About This Case

Tax Consequences (full category)

VIRGINIA: Arbuckle v. Arbuckle, ___ Va. App. ___, 470 S.E.2d 147 (1996).
The trial court erred in considering the tax consequences of a hypothetical sale when valuing the husband's dental practice.
Read More About This Case

Transmutation of Property (full category)

VIRGINIA: Utsch v. Utsch, 28 Va. App. 450, 565 S.E.2d 345 (2002).
A deed of gift conveying separate property into joint names is not conclusive proof of a gift to the marital estate. The parol evidence rule does not bar the admission of evidence suggesting a lack of true donative intent. But the form of the deed is some relevant evidence that such donative intent existed.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: von Robb v. von Robb, 26 Va. App. 239, 494 S.E.2d 156 (1997).
The parties' jointly titled residence was marital property in its entirety because the husband's original separate property interest in the home was not retraceable in view of intervening loan transactions.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Rahbaran v. Rahbaran, 26 Va. App. 195, 494 S.E.2d 135 (1997).
The husband failed to trace any portion of his existing business interests back to separate property. This pair of Virginia cases sheds light on the process of tracing transmuted or commingled property back to a separate property interest.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Theismann v. Theismann, 22 Va. App. 557, 471 S.E.2d 809 (1996).
The trial court was not plainly wrong in concluding that the husband intended to make a gift when he placed assets in joint title with the wife, and the decision to make a relatively equal distribution of the gifted property did not constitute an abuse of discretion despite the short duration of the marriage.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Lightburn v. Lightburn, 22 Va. App. 612, 472 S.E.2d 281 (1996).
The short duration of the parties' marriage did not justify awarding the wife one-half of the value of real property that the husband conveyed into a tenancy by the entirety two months before the parties' separation.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Gottlieb v. Gottlieb, ___ Va. App. ___, 448 S.E.2d 666 (1994).
Evidence supported the trial court's finding that the husband's business interests were transmuted to marital property by the wife's monetary and nonmonetary contributions during the marriage.
Read More About This Case

Valuation of Property (full category)

VIRGINIA: Shackelford v. Shackelford, 39 Va. App. 201, 571 S.E.2d 917 (2002).
The price paid in a prior purchase of a 50% interest in a business was not evidence of the value for divorce purposes, because the price included a substantial control premium and was therefore greater than the fair market value.
Read More About This Case

VIRGINIA: Rowe v. Rowe, 33 Va. App. 250, 532 S.E.2d 908 (2000).
The husband's sale of stock for more than four times the valuation accepted by the trial court required a revaluation of the price at the time of marriage and divorce.
Read 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.
Read More About This Case

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

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.