New Zealand Husband and Wife’s marriage hits the rocks.
Husband is – or at least was – quite wealthy. In 2006, Husband disclosed to a potential creditor assets worth $28 million and an annual income of $1 million.
According to Wife, Husband owns about 135 businesses and numerous properties and trusts.
Wife, on the other hand, appears to be on public assistance due to Husband allegedly withholding reasonable support.
In response, Husband claims to be bankrupted by $180 million in debt and contends that the couple’s debt exceeds their assets.
The New Zealand Family Court freezes Husband’s bank accounts and stocks.
Wife asserts that Husband’s life style has been constant since before the divorce, although he may have created an appearance on paper of hardship.
The New Zealand Family Court appears to be stuck in the middle, persuaded of the reality of Husband’s enormous legal debt load.
The couple separated in 2007 and their case was filed in or before 2008. But there does not appear to be an end in sight.
Read more in this New Zealand Stuff news article: Bankrupt keeps life of luxury says wife.
Today was Father’s Day.
While many fathers celebrate their day with their children, some fathers don’t get to see their children at all on Father’s Day.
In Canada, it appears that parental alienation syndrome drives a wedge between many fathers and their children … with family court approval.
One Canadian father reports that a family court judge asked him:
“Why should I let you see your daughter?”
The situation is reportedly so severe in Canada that male suicides far outpace female suicides.
Father’s rights groups offer support – and lobbying for joint and equal parenting.
Read more in this Winnipeg [Canada] Sun news article: No happy Father’s Day for many dads.
A case on appeal before the Tennesse Supreme Court reflects tensions and shifts in alimony practice that are playing out nationwide.
Husband and Wife are ending a long-term marriage (roughly twenty years) that began in college. They were forty-three when their divorce was filed.
Both spouses have worked throughout their marriage. Husband earns about $137,000 in the private sector and Wife earns roughly half that in a government job.
Because of the length of Husband’s and Wife’s marriage and the disparity in their incomes, a lower court ordered Husband to pay Wife permanent alimony of $1,250 per month.
On appeal by Husband, the heart of his challenge is that, despite the disparity in their incomes and the substantial length of their marriage, Wife is not dependent because she worked throughout the marriage and the divorcing spouses are too young for the court to order permanent alimony, especially in such a large amount.
(In contrast to a divorcing couple with a long-term marriage where the Wife was / is a stay-at-home mother for a significant period of time and would potentially be entering / returning to the job market over the age of fifty. Clearly, an intended beneficiary of the law providing for permanent alimony.)
The Tennessee high court’s forthcoming ruling could impact the future evolution of permanent alimony awards in Tennessee. And, possibly, beyond.
Read more in this [Franklin, IN] Daily Journal news article: Tenn. Supreme Court hears oral arguments in lifetime alimony case.
About a year ago, I posted about a Central Florida Attorney in the Thick of International Child Abduction Case Regarding His Stepson.
And now, a year later, an eleven year old boy who has spent most of his life in the Ocala, Florida area, must return to Costa Rica to live with his biological father.
The “psychological father” who raised him, a Florida attorney, exhausted all available legal options in an effort to allow the boy to remain in his Florida home.
The attorney was married for several years to the boy’s mother, who has a drug problem, but never legally adopted the boy.
During mother and son’s annual visit to Costa Rica, the boy’s biological father sought custody and was able to hold the boy there.
The Florida attorney hired a contractor to recover the boy, but the boy’s biological father pursued the boy’s return in American courts.
Read more in this Ocala Star-Banner news article: Boy, 11, headed back to Costa Rica..
Michigan Mother has a three year old Toddler.
A Neighbor finds Toddler walking in the parking lot of a business next to a busy highway. The Neighbor contacts law enforcement authorities.
When authorities contact Mother, Mother is asleep and slow to respond. Authorities learn that a similar incident took place a week before.
Toddler is taken into protective custody and placed in foster care.
The government files a dependency petition alleging neglect of Toddler.
On a temporary basis, Mother is granted only weekly supervised visitation with Toddler by the Michigan family court. The family court Mother also orders that Mother be subjected to random drug testing.
Read more in this [Bad Axe, MI] Huron Daily Tribune article: Bad Axe mother to have supervised visitation.
Arizona Husband and Wife have three Daughters.
Husband and Wife divorce.
Husband is ordered to pay child support for Daughters.
But Husband quickly joins the ranks of “deadbeat dads”.
Husband’s past due child support grows to $27,0000.
With interest, past due child support skyrockets to over $93,000.
Thirty years go by.
Daughters are grown.
Wife is unemployed … for over a year.
The state child support agency locates Husband … and a substantial bank account in his name. It has roughly two hundred thousand dollars in it.
The child support agency attaches Husband’s bank account and recovers the past due child support, all $93,000 and change.
Wife, having long since given up on ever collecting the child support Husband owes her, gets a huge surpriser when the child support agency turns the money over to her.
Read more in this [Phoenix] KPHO 5 TV news article: Struggling Mom Gets $93K In Back Child Support.
California Mother and Father have three year old Son together.
During Father’s visitation and timesharing, Father allegedly abducts Son, from California to Arizona.
For the second time this year.
An arrest warrant is issued for Father.
Son is found, unhurt, with both of his parents.
Mother’s role in the incident is unclear.
Son is taken into child protective custody.
The timesharing during which Father allegedly makes off with Son is a visitation supervised by Child Protective Services.
Read more in this [Palm Springs, CA] Desert Magazine article: Abducted 3-year-old from Moreno Valley found unharmed in Arizona.
Colorado Husband and Wife are in the process of divorcing.
Husband is required to pay Wife alimony or spousal support of $2,500 per month.
Wife disappears while walking her dog a couple of months ago.
Police suspect foul play in Wife’s disappearance, but don’t appear to have any solid leads.
Authorities have impounded Husband’s girlfriend’s automobile though.
Husband apparently seeks to modify temporary spousal support.
A Colorado family court judge, however, orders Husband to continue to pay the previously ordered alimony.
Read more in this [Denver] ABC 7 News article: Missing Woman’s Husband Must Keep Paying Alimony.
Husband is in jail for contempt of a family court order.
Seventy-two year old Wife allegedly transfers approximately $12,000 from one of Husband’s individual bank accounts to a joint account using online banking.
Wife contends that she is entitled to the $12,000, because Husband owes her alimony and other monies.
But Wife has no legal right to access Husband’s individual account. Just the power, by virtue of knowing Husband’s social security number.
Wife is charged with embezzling the money from Husband.
Wife enters a guilty plea on the charge.
Husband is Wife’s tenth husband.
Wife was previously convicted of bigamy for marrying Husband while she was still married to another man.
The Virginia criminal court orders Wife to make restitution to the bank.
Wife is currently serving a sentence of five years’ incarceration, with four years suspended, on her bigamy conviction.
Wife is awaiting sentencing on the embezzlement charge.
Read more in this [Newport News, VA] Daily Press article: Bigamist guilty in theft from husband.
Retirement savings accumulated by either spouse during a marriage are marital property and subject to property division in a divorce. That’s the law in Florida.
But an astonishing number of spouses either don’t know this or choose to disregard it.
For a dependent spouse, nothing beats accumulating retirement savings in their own name.
But is that possible for a stay at home homemaker or parent who doesn’t have paid employment? Maybe.
Normally, a person has to have earned income in order to sock money into a retirement account. But there are some exceptions:
- If the dependent spouse’s spouse has earned income, the dependent spouse can put money into their own retirement savings based on their spouse’s income. But keep in mind that the dependent spouse’s deposits reduce what the other spouse may put into their own retirement account.
- If the dependent spouse receives alimony or spousal support, that support is considered income for purposes of determining whether and how much the dependent spouse may put into savings for their retirement.
Read more in this Forbes piece: 4 Ways to Make IRA Contributions Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Without A Job!.