Start Your Divorce Today - Premium Divorce Online


State Specific Community Forums >> Colorado Issues

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
ColoradoDivorce
recently joined


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 16
No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist
      #292802 - 09/19/07 07:51 AM

THIS IS a WINNER!
You should know that Judge Ronald G. Crowder, (4th District CO, Elpaso County) recently allowed a 14 year old closed divorce case to be reopened to allow a woman to get a new life insurance policy (additional property benefits) that she FORGOT to ask for when she originally divorced her military husband!! Yes, despite not having an insurable interest (as per case law) and no right to re-open a painfully and fully negotiated closed property settlement--that was incorporated into a Final Order for Dissolution (as per case law), the ex-wife was NOW granted the right to get insurance on her ex-husband of 14 years ago---because Judge Crowder allowed himself to testify in the case by saying: "I don't see what the big deal is... I gave it to MY wife when I divorced her... it shouldn't take that long to do an examination." He overruled every argument made based on facts and the LAW---and based his decision solely on his OWN personal experiences! See September 5, 2007 decision in 93DR0266. The effect of this wonderful decision is that NO DIVORCE CASE IS EVER CLOSED IN COLORADO! The parties can now keep coming back to ask for benefits---even when the benefit was NOT an existing property issue...OR even if the parties had competent counsel! If you forget to ask for anything---SBP, Life Insurance, permanent alimony, future earnings(even if you had a lawyer, even several) you can NOW come back and ask for MORE $$$$$!!

(This kind of thing has been denied in Colorado for decades... and denied in other jurisdictions---because it is against the law and against public policy---but NOT in Judge Crowder's court room)!

This is very serious!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jil_stevens
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 07/31/06
Posts: 3893
Re: No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist [Re: ColoradoDivorce]
      #294245 - 09/21/07 09:13 PM

Even more interesting...

The case you speak of, the wife was awarded a portion of his military retirement when they divorced in 1993. He didn't retire until May of 2007. That's just a couple of months ago.

He "should" have signed her up for SBP and failed to do so, now it is past the opportunity and that can't be done.

All she is asking for is the court to order him to submit to an insurance physical so that SHE can take out insurance on him to cover the loss of the retirement benefits if anything should happen to him. She isn't even asking him to pay for the policy or take out the policy.

I, too, think it is utterly reasonable and not a big deal. If he didn't want to have to do a physical then he should have signed her up for SBP when he had the opportunity instead of being an a$$hole about everything.

BTW...it doesn't matter at all how long a case has been closed. There is no statute of limitations. Otherwise, that would be perfect. "I'm sorry...you can't collect child support anymore because the order is 14 years old. Nanny nanny boo boo!" Nobody would ever have to do anything that was ordered in a divorce; just hold it out long enough for the statute of limitations to apply.

If you are a party to the case, I would imagine you were the guy who is supposed to take the physical. In which case stop being such a jerk. She has a legitimate right to insure her property, including retirement pay, against a loss.

If you are not a party to the case, you should check the facts before you try to slander a judge...that can be quite serious. Considering I have the email address of his clerk in my address book, it wouldn't take much at all for him to find out what you posted about him.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ColoradoDivorce
recently joined


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 16
Re: No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist [Re: jil_stevens]
      #294668 - 09/23/07 11:57 AM

Yes, the wife was awarded a portion of his retirement as a part of a negotiated property settlement 14 years ago. She should have asked for SBP or insurance at that time, not come back 14 years later. She never appealed the decision in their divorce. Odd.

He didn't need to sign her up for SBP. You elect to do that, it's not a duty. He didn't fail to do anything. The law that gives her a right to a portion of his retirement pay indicates that she loses it if he dies. She needed to protect herself--and request SBP during the settlement negotiations, he had no duty to do so. Show me the law where he was required to protect her? There isn't any. Yes, it is past the time to get SBP and it ALSO past the time to demand additional benefits under a closed settlement agreement negotiated 14 years ago. Yes, all she is asking is that the court order that he submit to a physical so she can buy a life insurance policy on him. BUT she has no insurable interest here. Have you looked at the law on this? Have you looked at the law on reopening a closed property settlement? This judge made a decision that this matter fell under contracts law... that failure to specifically say that you exclude insurance means there was not a meeting of the minds. HUH? Meeting of the minds/mutual assent is about having an understanding of what you are agreeing to... what is contained IN the contract, not what you didn't include! Gosh, the husband never offered permanent alimony, a portion of social security, future earnings, clothing allowance, private jet... Talk about some whacked logic! And it seems to me, if you have failed to have a meeting of the minds on a contract--it applies to the whole document, not just a portion. So the entire document is void? Furthermore, if this is a debate about contract law, then doesn't basic contract law apply here "that the meaning of a contract is ascertained from the 4 corners of the instrument--when contract language is clear and explicit, the court should determine intent from the written provisions of the document and go no further." Insurance, permanent alimony, future earnings, etc. were not included. You can't come back and ask for MORE. Is he saying what was excluded should NOW be included---just because it was not specifically stated. Your friend got what she wanted out the negotiation.

You know what shocks me even more is this judge who did not want to hear one piece of law---. In fact, before coming to this hearing he stated "I don't see what the big deal is, I gave life insurance to my wife..." Then he said the same thing during the hearing... "I don't mean to testify here, but I gave my ex-wife insurance and it only took five minutes. Do you think it would take longer than 5 minutes...?" WHO cares what he gave his wife! And who cares about the time it takes for a physical! THIS was not about his divorce or about the amount of time it would take for a physical! It was about whether she had the right to reopen a closed divorce settlement, whether she had an insurable interest, and whether there was reason to believe a crime could be committed if insurance was granted... NONE of that was considered. It was overruled each time it was brought up. (Do you want to debate that? It's in the transcript).

It does not matter that she wants to pay for the policy. That's not the point either! You cannot force someone to have a life insurance policy put on their life. PERIOD.

Trust me... he was NEVER an *sshole about anything. This woman was treated very well in this divorce...

BTW--Nice red herring on the child support...You win no points with that one. Listen, I have not posted one thing that didn't happen in that case. There is NO slander here. I had no opinion about the Judge at all...just about how the hearing was conducted and the decision. It is not supported by law. That's the only point here.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jil_stevens
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 07/31/06
Posts: 3893
Re: No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist [Re: ColoradoDivorce]
      #294737 - 09/23/07 04:00 PM

From what I read in the court documents, he was supposed to sign her up for SBP and didn't. So again, she was merely trying to enforce a prior court order.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ColoradoDivorce
recently joined


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 16
Re: No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist [Re: jil_stevens]
      #295492 - 09/25/07 07:39 AM

NO, he was not "supposed" to sign her up for SBP. There is nothing in the 1993 property settlement agreement that said that, NOR is there ANYTHING in law that forces a man to provide SBP or insurance. (You have to ask for it at the time of the settlement negotiation---it's not automatic).

This is not an property settlement enforcement issue... it's a property settlement modification--which you CAN'T do under the law. PERIOD. Colorado law is clear on that issue, as is the law in other jurisdictions.

Imagine if we could all go back and modify our divorce property settlement agreements to get whatever we "forgot" to ask for... Kind defeats the idea that a "final decree for dissolution" is FINAL. LOL!

Yes, just when you thought you had that crazy ex behind you, HE's / SHE's BACCCCK!!!! Greedy paws out asking for more$$$$$$!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ColoradoDivorce
recently joined


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 16
Re: No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist [Re: jil_stevens]
      #295495 - 09/25/07 07:41 AM

Did you get the documents through an online service? Can you give me the URL?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ColoradoDivorce
recently joined


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 16
Re: No divorce settlement final in CO now per 4th Dist [Re: jil_stevens]
      #372333 - 03/09/08 07:47 PM

Jil--never heard back from you, nevertheless, I managed to get a copy of the Order and Hearing Transcript--and they bear out EVERY SINGLE POINT I made in my earlier postings. E-V-E-R-Y POINT.

If you or anyone else would like a copy, let me know.

Edited by ColoradoDivorce (03/09/08 07:48 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ColoradoDivorce
recently joined


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 16
Re: SBP [Re: jil_stevens]
      #388950 - 04/12/08 07:22 PM

FYI--According to the laws governing SBP, a spouse that remarries before age 55 LOSES the right to SBP. (Check the law).

So since the ex-wife clearly intended to remarry 9 days after the divorce was final (and arranged to collect 9 days of alimony), she was NEVER in a position to expect or demand SBP in the first place!!!

The husband was under no legal obligation to give her SBP--nor could he ever sign her up for it anyway--she was never going to qualify!

(It was her actions that prevented her from receiving SBP---not his!)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1



Extra information
0 registered and 1 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  dsAdmin 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is disabled

Rating:
Topic views: 4236

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us Divorce Source Home

*
UBB.threads™ 6.5.1.1


Resources & Tools
Start Your Divorce Online Start Your Divorce
Several Options to Get Started Today.
Divorce Tools Online Divorce Tools
Keeping it Simple to Get the Job Done.
Divorce Downloads Download Center
Instantly Download Books, Guides & Forms.
Divorce and Custody Books Discount Books
Over 100 of the Best Divorce & Custody Books.
Negotiate Online Negotiate Online
Settle your Divorce and Save.
Custody and Support Tracking Custody Scheduling
Make Sure You Document Everything.

Easily Connect With a Lawyer or Mediator
Have Divorce Professionals from Your Area Contact You!
Enter Your Zip Code: