Tag: Property Division

Enforcing a Gusher of an Equitable Distribution Award

After his divorce, Todd Kozel, a former oil executive, was ordered by a family court to transfer 23 million shares from his oil company to his wife as equitable distribution. When he didn’t, a $38 million judgment was entered against him. Why was that enforcement order overturned?

Equitable Distribution Oil

Striking Oil

Todd and Ashley married in 1992, and she filed for divorce in 2010. Todd is the chief executive officer of Gulf Keystone Petroleum, Ltd., an oil and gas exploration company.

When the parties divorced, much of their shared wealth consisted of Gulf Keystone stock, which is publicly traded in London. The parties settled after he agreed to transfer Gulf Keystone stock to Ashley as equitable distribution.

Under their Settlement Agreement, the husband was obligated to transfer twenty-three million shares of Gulf Keystone stock to his wife as equitable distribution on or before January 27, 2012. Upon delivery, the former wife would then be free to sell her stock to anyone at any time.

But Todd didn’t deliver his twenty-three-million shares by January 27, 2012. Instead, he transferred the stock to her in four batches at later dates: (1) 2,034,447 shares on January 30, 2012; (2) 3,798,886 shares on February 3, 2012; (3) 5,666,667 shares on February 21, 2012; and (4) 11,600,000 shares on March 1, 2012.

Invoking the trial court’s continuing jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, Ashley filed papers with the family court. Although her filings were styled as petitions to enforce the agreement, they alleged what amounted to claims for money damages for alleged breaches of their agreement.

After granting partial summary judgment on liability and holding a trial on damages, the family court found Todd in breach and awarded her: $34,611,702 as damages for his failure to deliver the stock on time and another $3,850,500 as damages for the breach to provide tax information.

Florida Equitable Distribution

Why was Ashley awarded so much of Todd’s Gulf Keystone stock? I have written about equitable distribution before. Florida is an equitable distribution state when it comes to dividing business assets in divorce.

In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, in addition to all other remedies available to a court to do equity between the parties, a court must set apart to each spouse that spouse’s non-marital assets and liabilities.

When distributing the marital assets between spouses, a family court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors.

When the Oil Runs Out

While Todd was in default for his failure to timely deliver the Gulf Keystone stock, he made all of the additional equitable distribution payments required. On November 28, 2012 — eight months after the final transfer of stock — Ashley argued that Todd’s breach of the agreement caused her to suffer substantial damages because it denied her an opportunity to sell the stock at a time when market conditions were favorable.

But Todd argued that a family court lacks jurisdiction to consider Ashley’s claim because what she was asking for amounted to a claim for general damages for breach of contract.

So, Ashley amended her petition, styling it as one to “enforce” the agreement. She alleged that the court had jurisdiction to enforce the agreement through an award of damages for losses that she allegedly incurred as a result of the failure to deliver the stock timely.

The family judge awarded her $34,611,702 and another for the tax basis dispute $3,850,500, to be placed in escrow (presumably pending the outcome of a refund request to the IRS).

The question in a case like this is whether and to what extent a family court’s continuing jurisdiction to enforce a final judgment extends to claims for money damages for breaches of a settlement agreement.

When a court orders compliance with the terms of a settlement agreement – when it requires a party to perform an obligation in the agreement — it is engaged in proper post-judgment enforcement over which it has continuing jurisdiction. But when a court awards damages as a substitute for a party’s performance, it is not engaging in legitimate post-judgment enforcement but a separate claim for breach.

The former wife sought and the family court awarded general, benefit-of-the-bargain damages for the breach of the agreement that was not specified in the agreement. In reversing the judgement, the appellate court ruled that “couching these remedies as “enforcement” of the [agreement] does not change what their substance is: general damages for breach.”

The opinion is here.

 

Divorce and Business Property Division

When one of Zach Hendrix’s three business partners said he was getting divorced, sympathy turned into shock as everyone realized that a soon-to-be ex-wife could become a co-owner. Understanding the law around business and property division in a divorce is the first step to protecting yourself.

business property divisions

Open for Business

When a small business owner divorces, the company can become part of a property fight; the battle can end with owners losing all or part of their businesses. Or, they or the company may be forced to take on debt to prevent an ex from sharing ownership.

Even when ownership isn’t at stake, the rancor and uncertainty around a divorce can take a toll on a company — owners may be distracted and unable to focus on what the business needs.

Hendrix and two of his co-owners had to borrow a combined $250,000 to buy out their partner in 2017 after he announced his divorce plans. A startup, and not in a position to get that much credit, the three had to personally guarantee the loans. They were able to repay the debt in a year and a half out of their profits.

The divorce was a learning experience for the partners. When they started, they hadn’t written what’s known as a buy-sell agreement that creates a process and sets a price for buying out a partner.

Florida Business Property Division

I have written about property division recently. Florida is an equitable distribution state when it comes to dividing businesses in divorce.

In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, in addition to all other remedies available to a court to do equity between the parties, a court must set apart to each spouse that spouse’s non-marital assets and liabilities.

There are several factors to know whether a business interest is marital. First, you will need to look at the date of marriage and the date the business interest was acquired.

Additionally, you should look to the source of funds used to start the business, and also if there were money and labor contributions to the business given by either spouse during the marriage. In distributing the marital assets and liabilities between the parties, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution.

Whenever an agreement cannot be made between the spouses, the court’s distribution of marital assets or marital liabilities must be supported by factual findings and be based on competent evidence.

Once you have determined whether an interest in a business is marital, how do you actually determine what that interest is worth?

There are three approaches to value a business interest: (1) the asset approach; (2) the income approach; and (3) the market approach.  Each approach has inherent strengths and weaknesses.

Any valuation expert should consider all three approaches; however, it is often the case that all three approaches cannot be applied.

Back in business

The emotional fallout from a divorce can affect co-owners and employees. In his settlement with his wife, Jeffrey Deckman agreed to pay her $100,000 over four years; that amount was half what his telecommunications business was valued at.

Deckman borrowed money to make the payments, but having that debt hanging over him created stress that spilled over to his company.

“I started getting edgy, short-tempered, pushing hard for (sales) numbers that I never pushed so hard for before.”

He began fighting with his two business partners, and the discord affected everyone who worked there. It took six months for Deckman to realize what he was doing. “It showed me on a certain level that I hadn’t accepted responsibility for the deal I made,” he says.

But by the time Deckman understood that “I was making people pay,” he had damaged his relationship with his partners and staffers. In 2005, two years after the divorce, he realized that he needed to withdraw from working in the company, and in 2008 he sold his stake. Deckman, who now does consulting for small and mid-sized companies, believes despite losing his share of the business that he did the right thing in his divorce settlement.

He says of his ex-wife: “Today, years later, we are great friends and our children benefit greatly because of it.”

The Detroit News story is here.

 

The Art of Divorce

Dividing assets in a divorce is not only a requirement, it can be a difficult aspect of a divorce. If so, valuing an art collection is singularly one of the most disputed parts of a divorce. Not only is valuation a problem, but people are emotionally attached to their artwork as one billionaire couple in New York has found out.

art of divorce

Billionaire’s Row

The ex-husband is Harry Macklowe, a real estate developer. The ex-wife is Linda Macklowe, an honorary trustee of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, who is passionate about collecting modern art.

Together they have accumulated a $72 million apartment, so large it runs the full length of one side of the Plaza Hotel, with windows overlooking Central Park. A second Manhattan apartment is high up in one of the tallest buildings in the Western Hemisphere, along the so-called Billionaires’ Row.

Their $19 million house in the Hamptons on Long Island has neighbors with boldface names, including Martha Stewart and Steven Spielberg. The $23.5 million yacht is a 150-foot-long prizewinner.

And then there is the art collection, an enormous trove of masterpieces that the judge presiding over the divorce described as “extraordinary” and “internationally renowned” and that has become the latest chapter in the exes’ rancorous unraveling. Among the more than 150 pieces are multiple works by Pablo Picasso, Jeff Koons, Willem de Kooning and Mark Rothko.

The exes’ lawyers have fought about what most of them were worth — one rare moment of agreement came when two art experts hired separately by the exes both valued an Andy Warhol creation filled with images of Marilyn Monroe at $50 million — and who should get them.

Florida Property Division

I have written about property division before. Florida is an equitable distribution state when it comes to dividing art in divorce. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, in addition to all other remedies available to a court to do equity between the parties, a court must set apart to each spouse that spouse’s nonmarital assets and liabilities.

In distributing the marital assets and liabilities between the parties, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution.

Whenever an agreement cannot be made between the spouses, the court’s distribution of marital assets or marital liabilities must be supported by factual findings and be based on competent evidence. Whether the court distributes artwork equally or not, the court must make specific written findings of fact as to each marital asset and the individual valuation of significant assets, and designation of which spouse shall be entitled to each asset.

Because an effective valuation is important, most attorneys will hire an expert appraiser to provide the appropriate report and testimony to the court.

It’s Up to You New York, New York

The Macklowes’ divorce comes with the twist of an impressive art collection that has been valued at as much as nearly $1 billion. In 2016, Mr. Macklowe told Ms. Macklowe that the marriage was over. By the end of last year, the Macklowes’ divorce had been granted. Mr. Macklowe then put giant images of himself and Patricia Landeau, his new wife, on the side of a luxury condominium building in Manhattan that he built.

But the wrangling continued over how to divide an art collection that David N. Redden, a former vice chairman of Sotheby’s, called “fairly staggering” and “one of the great prizes.” In the Macklowes’ divorce, the former spouses had to unload the art “to sustain their lifestyle. They don’t have the cash.” About 60 to 75 percent of their assets were tied up in the art collection.

As for the value of the art, during the lower-court proceeding, each side hired an expert to appraise the art. Mr. Macklowe’s expert estimated the value at $788 million; Ms. Macklowe’s expert said $625 million.

“If this had been a case with one or two fewer zeros, it would be an ordinary kind of dispute. Because of the prominence of the parties and the amount of money involved, this is a case that attracts natural attention.”

Ms. Macklowe did not want to let anything go. “She stated that she wished to enjoy the collection and sell individual pieces only as necessary to support her standard of living.” That would have posed tax problems for Mr. Macklowe. The wife wanted all the major pieces of art to go to her, and she would decide what to sell and when to sell it. The husband would have to pay taxes on what would be sold, because the value that would be attributed to the works would be the after-tax value. She would keep the art, the art would get sold and he would pay the taxes.

The New York Times article is here.

 

Divorce and the Engagement Ring

Kim Kardashian reportedly refused to give back her engagement ring to estranged husband, former basketball player, Kris Humphries. Is a spouse obligated to return an engagement ring after a divorce has been filed – whether the ring is worth $2mm or not?

engagement ring

Keeping Up with the Kardashians

A source close to the Kardashian situation reports that her husband Kris contends that the marriage was a total sham and that Kim only wed him for publicity so therefore she has no right to keep such an expensive gift.

This is the latest battle in the drawn-out Kardashian-Humphries divorce proceedings. The reality star filed for divorce from Humphries in October 2011 after just 72-days of marriage. He responded a month later by filing for an annulment on the basis of fraud and a legal separation.

Florida Engagement Rings

I’ve written about some of the history and law about engagement rings before. Until the 1930s, a woman jilted by her fiancé could sue for financial compensation for “damage” to her reputation under what was known as the “Breach of Promise to Marry” action.

As courts began to abolish such actions, diamond ring sales rose in response to a need for a symbol of financial commitment from the groom. Florida abolished the appropriately termed “heart balm statutes”. Heart balm statutes were laws allowing couples to sue each other to recover money for the alienation of affections and breaches of contract to marry.

As one court poetically noted:

[A] gift given by a man to a woman on condition that she embark on the sea of matrimony with him is no different from a gift based on the condition that the donee sail on any other sea. If, after receiving the provisional gift, the donee refuses to leave the harbor – if the anchor of contractual performance sticks in the sands of irresolution and procrastination – the gift must be restored to the donor. A fortiori would this be true when the donee not only refuses to sail with the donor, but, on the contrary, walks up the gangplank of another ship arm in arm with the donor’s rival?

After an engagement ring is given, and if the couple doesn’t marry, in New York the law deems a broken engagement as no one’s fault. Accordingly, the ring should be given back to the giver, with few exceptions. Most states have adopted that approach.

This is true in Florida. Lawsuits to recover an engagement ring by disappointed donors usually are resolved by courts looking to see if the engagement was terminated by the donee or by mutual consent of the parties. The rationale is that rings are given on the implied condition that a marriage ensue.

Once a marriage proposal is extended and accepted — once the promise is made — no matter what day of the year, that ring is no longer considered a gift. It’s a contract to enter into marriage.

The general rule in Florida is that an engagement ring given before the marriage, becomes a non-marital gift if the marriage is completed. If so, the ring becomes the non-marital property of the Wife.

If the engagement ring is viewed by the court as a non-marital asset, it is not subject to equitable distribution in divorce proceedings, and the spouse keeps it as their own.

Reality TV

Relying on real attorneys and not Judge Judy, both sides of the Kardashian case have accused each other in court and in the media of deliberately slowing down the divorce process, which has lasted five times longer than their marriage.

Recently, Kardashian’s attorney told the judge that her client is “handcuffed to Mr. Humphries” because his team is still not ready for trial. The estranged couple is set to return to court in mid-February to determine a trial date.

The Huffington Post article is here.

 

Can your Spouse Secretly Sell your House?

Real Housewives of New Jersey star Danielle Staub is claiming her estranged husband Marty Caffrey listed their Englewood, N.J. home for sale without telling her. Can that happen in an equitable distribution state?

equitable distribution

Real Listing?

According to People:

“Danielle did not know her home, where she lives, was listed for sale until she saw a story about it online,” the rep says. “This is yet another example of the blatant disrespect and emotional abuse she has endured in this relationship.”

Caffrey, 66, filed for divorce from the reality star in August—just four months after their wedding, and Staub, 56, has been vocal about how hurt she was by how public their split was.

In July, Caffrey posted a negative rant about Staub on social media. The pair took out restraining orders against each other that same month following a domestic dispute at the New Jersey home that is now on the market. The restraining orders were both later dropped.

The six-bedroom, seven-bathroom house features a gourmet kitchen, high ceilings, a media room, and a sauna. The property is listed for $2.195 million with Frances Aaron and Miriam Finkel of Prominent Properties Sotheby’s International Realty.

When asked about the sale of their home, Caffrey tells People, “Danielle’s version is untrue and other than that I have no comment.”

Real Equitable Distribution

I’ve written about the equitable distribution of houses before. New Jersey, like Florida, is an equitable distribution state. California, and many other western states, are community property states.

In Florida, in every divorce the family court will set apart to each spouse that spouse’s nonmarital assets and liabilities, and in distributing the marital assets and liabilities between the parties, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal.

All real property held by the parties as tenants by the entireties, whether acquired prior to or during the marriage, is presumed to be a marital asset in Florida. If a spouse makes a claim to the contrary, the burden of proof shall be on the party asserting the claim that the property is nonmarital.

It is unclear whether Staub and Caffrey have joint title to the New Jersey house, or it is titled in one of their names alone, or even a holding company. Generally, it’s a good idea to have all title owners sign a contract, or it may not be enforceable against the owner who did not sign.

Real Troubles

Back in New Jersey, although Staub claims she was unaware of her home being put on the market, she recently told People that she considers herself a “warrior,” and her experience with this divorce has been no different.

Prior to their public problems, the two had trouble agreeing over many things in their relationship, Staub said. Tense dynamics with their blended family (Caffrey has three adult children from a previous relationship) also came into play.

“He doesn’t like me and he doesn’t like my children,” Staub claimed. “My kids have never been anything but respectful and lovely towards him even though he hasn’t been the same towards their mom.

Caffrey, in a statement to People at the time, said, “This is not my world nor do I have any further interest in it. These are manufactured celebrities in manufactured lives who manufacture their own truths. I look forward to getting back to my reality among real people. My loving family and vast amount of friends.”

The People article is here.

 

Today’s Property Division

According to People, former Today Show anchor, Matt Lauer, is finalizing his divorce with Annette Roque. The settlement is rumored to involve him paying his wife up to $20 million. The details of the property division however is unknown, but is a reminder that divorce property division laws in Florida recently changed in a big way.

Property Division

Good Morning Property Divisions

According to People, the couple, who wed 20 years ago in 1998, has agreed to share custody of their children. He is rumored to have a lot of guilt and wants to make sure Annette is taken care of.

Reportedly:

They seem happier and their family and friends are thrilled to see they are both moving forward.”

Left unsaid in the article is what happens to the $7 million coop in New York City, the Hamptons beachfront estate he bought for $36 million from actor Richard Gere, his Sag Harbor home, and other properties.

Florida Property Division . . . and Friends

I’ve written about property division before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by statute and case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their non-marital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties.

Marital assets and liabilities include, in part, assets acquired and liabilities incurred during the marriage, individually by either spouse or jointly by them.

Passive Appreciation and Morning Joe

Passive appreciation of a nonmarital asset may also be a marital asset the court must equitably distribute. For example, Lauer bought his upper East Side apartment for roughly $6 million, but has it listed for over $7 million.

In 2010, the Florida Supreme Court held that “passive appreciation of a nonmarital asset … is properly considered a marital asset where marital funds or the efforts of either party contributed to the appreciation.”

The Florida Supreme Court created a formula for courts to use in determining the value of the passive appreciation of nonmarital real property for equitable distribution.

But the formula was flawed because there is no relationship between the amount of marital funds used to pay down a mortgage during a marriage, and the passive appreciation of the property.

Also, the case requires a nonowner spouse to have made contributions to the property as a prerequisite to sharing in the passive appreciation of the property.

Live with Kaaa

Recently, Governor Scott signed a bill to fix the problem. The bill amends our equitable distribution statute and establishes a statutory formula for courts to use.

The new statutory formula does not require the nonowner spouse to have made contributions to the property, and also bars the marital portion of nonmarital real property from exceeding the total net equity of the property on the valuation date in the divorce action.

The People article is available here.

 

Divorce and Leaving the House

Rumors abound of marital discord between Melania and President Trump. Generally, couples fight over who stays and leaves the house during a divorce. What if the marital home is the White House should the First Lady move out?

Meet the Trumps

Some people are claiming the issue of vacating the marital house is uncharted territory for a sitting president (assuming they divorce), since no American president has ever gotten a divorce while in office.

Usually, both spouses are entitled to stay in the marital home. However, staying in the home can be denied if a spouse is damaging it, or the children are exposed to domestic violence, for instance.

However, Donald Trump doesn’t have a deed to the White House, it’s not his property. The White House is owned by the people of the United States of America.

There’s also the issue of presidential security. Having an estranged spouse in the White House may make the Secret Service uneasy if there were divorce proceedings.

Housing Issues

I’ve written about the marital house during a divorce before. Generally, the home remains a marital asset, which is subject to equitable distribution, regardless of who lives there during the divorce process.

If a home is marital then both parties have equal rights to buy – out the other’s share. Both may also be on the hook for liabilities.

Children’s Issues

Until a divorce parenting plan in place, if you are interested in maintaining a meaningful relationship in your child’s life, leaving the home before a timesharing agreement is entered may show a lack of real interest in the child’s daily life.

Moving out can create the appearance of a new ‘primary residential parent’ by default. Worse, if the process takes a long time, it creates a new status quo.

Cost

The person leaving during a divorce may still have to contribute for the expenses of the home while also paying for a new home. It can be costly, and prohibitive expensive when you know that the process will take a long time.

Settlement

Staying in the same home could create an incentive to negotiate a final settlement because living with your soon to be ex-spouse is very uncomfortable. However, if someone moves out, the person remaining in the home is sitting pretty and may be less inclined to settle.

If you Leave

Before moving out, there should be some discussions about maintaining the home and who is paying for which expenses, an inventory should be made of the personal property, artwork, silverware etc., and the boundaries for when the ‘out-spouse’ can use and enjoy the home after vacation

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Because both sides during a divorce have a right to live in a “jointly titled home” during divorce, except for extreme circumstances such as domestic violence, the First Lady should have no trouble.

However, the White House is part of the President’s compensation package for serving as President of the United States. If so, it is President Trump’s right to live there and not his spouse’s.

They could also both live in White House. The White House is built big enough that Melania would have an entire room, bedroom, almost a wing, just for herself.

Having been burned down by the British, the White House could easily handle divorcing spouses. Right?

The Daily News article is here.

 

Property Division is not Nirvana

Kurt Cobain’s acoustic guitar from the MTV Unplugged concert is legendary. The equitable distribution of Kurt’s iconic guitar was a major property division issue in the divorce between Kurt’s daughter and her husband. The case of Kurt’s guitar is now decided.

About a Girl

The divorce between Kurt Cobain’s daughter Frances Bean Cobain and her Isaiah Silva may be over, but Cobain lost a prized possession to her now Ex-Husband: her father’s famous guitar.

Isaiah claimed he owns Kurt’s former Martin D-18E guitar from the famed MTV performance. The guitar is a very rare; only 300 were made.

For the Cobains however, the guitar’s sentimental value is immeasurable, as it was the last guitar played by Kurt before his suicide.

Silva argued the model had given him the guitar as a present, while she denied ever giving it to him. That was for the judge to decide.

Florida Property Division

I’ve written about equitable distribution and various types of property divisions in Florida before. Let’s assume that the guitar was in fact a wedding gift from Frances to Isaiah.

What happens? In all likelihood, the guitar would be considered marital property, not just Isaiah’s, and would have to be equitably distributed.

In Florida, “Marital assets and liabilities” include interspousal gifts during the marriage. In divorce proceedings, the court must divide the marital assets between the parties.

Courts begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on certain relevant factors.

These factors include things like the contribution to the marriage by each spouse, the economic circumstances of the parties, and any interruption of personal careers or educational opportunities of either party for instance.

So, what are “marital assets and liabilities”? They include things like assets acquired during the marriage, and interspousal gifts during the marriage for instance.

However, “nonmarital assets” include things like assets acquired before the marriage, and assets acquired by non-interspousal gift. This sort of non-interspousal gift argument may have been similar to what Isaiah argued successfully in court.

Smells Like Teen Spirit

Although she lost the iconic guitar in the equitable distribution, Frances did get the house they bought together, and doesn’t have to provide any spousal support; Silva had been asking for $25,000 a month.

The People article is here.

 

Property Division is Not Half Bad

They say a guy knows he’s in love when he loses interest in his car. A Kansas man is showing the reverse is also true. Alternatively, that would explain why the Kansas man still clings to his half-of-a-car long after his love ended. At the very least,his half-a-car is physical proof that a property division means equal halves.

The Better Half

According to the Kansas City Star, the late-Edgerton Mayor, Ray Braun, used to own the gas station where the front half of his 1987 Chevrolet Citation is parked, a testament to a successful property division.

On the side of the car is a sign which reads:

“Divorced. She got ½.”

The former mayor is the culprit who put his half of the equitable distribution – the half-car – in front of the gas station.

Some view his half a car as a landmark. If you go to Kansas City, or anywhere around, and ask about this town, they have no clue where it’s at. But if you ask them, ‘You remember that little half-car that’s off 56?’ ‘Yeah!’ ‘Well, that’s that little town.

But at a special morning meeting, the three council members in attendance decided unanimously for the city attorney to draft a resolution to finally be rid of the half car.

Florida Property Division

I’ve written about property division in Florida many times before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by statute and case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their nonmarital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties. In dividing the marital assets and debts though, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal.

However, if there is a justification for an unequal distribution, the court can give less than equal.

When a court orders an unequal distribution, it must base the decision on certain factors, including some of the following:

  • The contribution to the marriage by each spouse.
  • The economic circumstances of the parties.
  • The duration of the marriage.
  • Any interruption of personal careers or educational opportunities.
  • The contribution to the personal career or educational opportunity of the other spouse.
  • The desirability of retaining any asset.
  • The intentional dissipation, waste, depletion, or destruction of marital assets after the filing of the petition or within 2 years prior to the filing of the petition.
  • Any other factors necessary to do equity and justice between the parties.

The courts don’t even have to wait for the end of the case to distribute property. Florida law allows courts, if they find good cause that there should be an interim partial distribution during a divorce action, to equitably distribute property sooner.

You Don’t Know the Half of It

Braun fitted his half-car with rear caster wheels and used to drive it in parades. But City Council President Clay Longanecker says the car has become “an eyesore” and the Edgerton codes department has ruled it has to be disposed of.

To some Edgerton residents however, the half-car has for years been seen as a welcoming post, a kind of unofficial eyesore monument. and some may fight to keep it.

The biggest joke of all? Braun was never divorced.

The Kansas City Star article is here.

 

Injunctions: Property Division on Ice

Rapper Vanilla Ice’s divorce is getting hot! His wife’s lawyers filed court papers trying to stop him from selling marital property by asking for a court injunction. You can’t have a property division if your spouse gets rid of the assets first. Here’s how to protect yourself.

Ice Ice Baby

According to TMZ, Vanilla Ice’s Wife wants to prevent a fire sale in the wake of their impending divorce, which has already gotten underway with him allegedly unloading their jet skis.

He’s a gentleman, he’s not hiding anything”

said a source in Ice’s entourage who asked to remain anonymous because there’s a gag order in the case.

Vanilla Ice’s estranged wife, Laura Van Winkle, filed a motion for an injunction to prevent her husband from selling marital property earlier this month to stop any more sales.

Freezing Assets

I’ve written about property division before, but a property division does you no good if the assets are long gone. How exactly do you avoid getting frozen out of your fair share of the property if your spouse is getting rid of it before a court can divide it? One way is an injunction.

Our divorce statute has a provision which specifically allows a court to freeze assets when either party is about to remove his or her property out of the state, or fraudulently convey or conceal it.

Florida courts can enter an injunction against the party or the property and make such orders as will secure alimony or support to the party who should receive it. A temporary injunction is an extraordinary remedy which are granted sparingly. The requirement to even be entitled to a temporary injunction, are tough.

In conclusion, Mrs. Ice must show that she will suffer irreparable harm unless the status quo is maintained; she has no adequate remedy at law; she has a clear legal right to the relief requested; and, the temporary injunction will serve the public interest.

There are plenty of examples of injunctions being used to prevent the waste of property. For example, they can be used to prevent both the sale of a home and prohibit you from going into further debt through a mortgage or line of credit.

Jet Skis on Ice

According to the article, Mrs. Ice claims Vanilla is in possession of nearly all of the couple’s marital assets, and she can’t stop him from doing what he wants with their property without a court injunction.

Mrs. Ice filed her original divorce petition in 2016. She asked to be allowed to stay in the family house, child support for the ice, ice baby, alimony, and attorney’s fees.

The TMZ article is here.