Posts

Frank McCourt files for lower alimony payments

Any divorce has the potential to become a complex divorce. When there is a large amount of assets involved, the chances that the divorce will become complex increase. The divorce between Frank and Jamie McCourt is a good example of how this can happen.

In the latest round in the prolonged divorce contest between McCourts, Frank McCourt is disputing the amount of spousal support, or alimony, that he is required to pay. Frank McCourt argues that his wife is living extravagantly and that he cannot afford to continue funding her lifestyle while the divorce is finalized. Jamie McCourt contends that he is mismanaging his funds, and could sell his half of the Dodgers to cover costs of the divorce.

A previous court order mandated that Frank McCourt was to pay his ex-wife more than $600,000 per month, including $400,000 in payments on seven homes that are in her name. He would like these payments to be reduced.

The seven properties, which are all titled in Jamie McCourt’s name, are currently a major part of the divorce dispute. Jamie McCourt refuses to either sell or rent the properties, and Frank McCourt continues to have to pay the mortgages.

Because the Dodgers are also now in bankruptcy, Frank McCourt’s annual income has fallen to $5 million. His income does not cover the court-ordered payments to his ex-wife, and he has declared in filings that he has spent $8 million on support for Jamie McCourt in the last year, compared to about $600,000 on his own expenses.

Jamie McCourt questions Frank’s personal financial situation, contending that he is exaggerating any financial difficulties he may be having. She also questions Frank McCourt’s ability to run the Dodgers, whose value has significantly decreased in the last two years.

Frank McCourt’s motion to lower his payments to Jamie McCourt will be heard next month.

Source: ESPN, “Frank McCourt seeks reduced payments,” Josh Fisher, 15 July 2011

/by

Wisconsin Supreme Court tells ex-wife to wait for alimony

In a recent opinion upholding, the Wisconsin Supreme Court distinguished between pension benefits paid by a pension plan and disability benefits paid pursuant to the same plan.

In Topolski v. Topolski, the husband and wife both waived maintenance, sometimes referred to as alimony, when they got divorced. Mr. Topolski agreed to pay Mrs. Topolski $912 per month beginning “if and when” he started to receive pension and retirement benefits.

Mr. Topolski, an electrician, later became disabled when he was 53 years old. Accordingly, he began receiving monthly disability benefits from his pension plan. His ex-wife filed a motion for judgment for her monthly payments, with interest, in arrears from the date of his disability.

Mrs. Topolski received a judgment for $83,072 plus interest from the divorce court, and the judge held Mr. Topolski in contempt of court for not making the monthly payments to his ex-wife. Mr. Topolski appealed that order on the basis that the court’s order amounted to maintenance.

The Court of Appeals reversed the Circuit Court, and Mrs. Topolski appealed. Siding with her ex-husband, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the plain and ordinary meaning of the language in the parties’ agreement, “pension and retirement benefits,” did not include the disability benefits that Mr. Topolski had received from the pension plan. Instead, Mr. Topolski must begin paying Mrs. Topolski when he turns 62, the age when he becomes eligible for pension benefits.

A dissenting opinion pointed out that the Circuit Court merely divided the disability benefits, an asset that the marital settlement agreement did not dispose of in the divorce. The parties agreed to divide “all” pensions, said the dissent, and the disability payments were, in effect, a pension plan.

Source: WisLawJournal.com, “Be careful what you bargain for, you might just get it,” Gregg Herman, July 14, 2011

Topolski v. Topolski, 2009AP2433-FT, (Wis. 2011)

/by

States are changing the way they view alimony

Just as the definition of marriage is changing today, with a growing number of states recognizing civil unions between same sex couples, the traditional view of divorce is changing, too, specifically when it comes to alimony payments.

A growing number of states are enacting new laws that throw away the old notion that alimony payments are a lifetime entitlement following divorce.

The Washington Times recently reported on a new bill in Massachusetts that limits the amount of time that some divorced spouses can receive alimony payments. The bill passed that state’s Senate unanimously.

The new bill says that couples who divorce before hitting their five-year anniversary can expect alimony to last just a few months or years, depending on the length of the marriage, the Washington Times reports. Couples who divorce after a marriage that lasts for decades might expect alimony to last until the former spouse making payments reaches official retirement age.

As the Times reports, Massachusetts is far from alone in taking steps to rework alimony payments. The story cites Texas and Mississippi, both states that award alimony payments only in marriages lasting at least 10 years. In Utah, former spouses only have to make alimony payments for as many years as the marriage itself lasted.

Supporters praise these changes, saying that the concept of alimony was long due for a reworking. Critics worry that some state measures go too far, and could leave former spouses in financially dire situations.

Whatever side of the issue you’re on, one thing is becoming clear: You can expect even more states to change the way alimony works.

Source: The Washington Times, “States no longer wedded to idea of alimony for life,” Cheryl Wetzstein, July 28, 2011

/by

High asset divorce can involve alimony disputes

There are a multitude of issues that divorcing couples in Wisconsin must address in order to come to fair marital property settlements. One of those issues is spousal maintenance, also commonly referred to as alimony.

Spousal maintenance can be awarded to one spouse in order to help that person maintain the lifestyle that he or she had become accustomed to prior to a divorce. Maintenance awards are often granted to stay-at-home spouses who gave up their careers in order to stay home with the children.

Generally speaking, after spending a lifetime out of the workplace, it is difficult to enter back into the workforce, especially in today’s tough economic climate. Alimony is intended to alleviate this burden. However, many couples have a hard time reaching an agreement about this issue. .

A TV anchorman and his ex-wife are currently battling over alimony. In 2010, the couple was granted an order of divorce in which the wife was to receive permanent spousal maintenance of more than $16,000 per month. The court did not consider whether the wife could become self-supporting.

The ex-husband, who makes around $525,000 per year appealed that decision on the grounds that the wife does has a college degree in education and held a job as a special education teacher for five years during the early years of their marriage. He argued that she is capable of working and says she could earn a salary to help support herself.

On the other hand, the ex-wife has not worked full-time in 25 years, since the couple started having children. Although she home-schooled one of her children and has volunteered as a tennis and dance coach, she has only been employed part-time as a fitness instructor, earning around $3,000 each year.

The appeals court in this case agreed with the husband and ruled that the lower court should consider the ability of the wife to eventually become self-supporting and the possibility of prospective earnings.

The case is now being sent back to the lower court to consider these possibilities. Based on those considerations, it is possible that the wife’s alimony award will be limited in time or in amount. Hopefully, taking all factors into account, the court will come to a fair resolution.

Source: The Pioneer Press, “Fox 9 anchor Passolt in alimony dispute,” Emily Gurnon,” Aug. 22, 2011

/by

Gathering evidence to terminate alimony payments

Wisconsin residents, particularly those who have been through a divorce, may be interested in an article detailing ways to gather evidence in order to terminate alimony payments. When an ex-spouse is in a new relationship, he or she may no longer require these payments, but it takes adequate proof and a court hearing to make a termination happen.

For many divorced spouses, paying alimony is an ongoing commitment that is financially and emotionally stifling as they try to move on from the end of their marriage. When an ex-spouse begins a relationship with another partner, often that ex will attempt to hide this fact. This is because cohabitation with a new partner could lead to termination of the spousal support payments. In order to prove that the ex no longer needs that alimony payments, it must be shown that he or she cohabitating and that both new partners are financially and socially “interdependent.”

This can be evidenced by the sharing of bills, babysitting of each other’s children and other ways that can be proven by a private investigator. However, evidence of continued cohabitation can be expensive to gather. Cellphone location data can show a person’s movements to and from the place of cohabitation. This technique, used by investigators, allows the gathering of the cohabitation evidence with much less cost to the spouse than hiring an investigator to document these movements over a period of months.

This evidence can then be used to file for an alimony termination in civil court. A divorce attorney may be helpful in ensuring that the proper proof is gathered and the filing is done correctly. This might facilitate a prompt and speedy resolution to a spousal support issue.

Source: The Huffington Post , “Using a Cell Phone to Show That Your Former Spouse Is Cohabiting“, Diane Danois , January 24, 2014

/by