In Re Marriage of Richmond v. Richmond
Trial court erroneously exercised discretion when it included appreciation of a farm in the marital estate based on contributions to marriage as a whole rather than the individual contributions of each party.
Trial court erroneously exercised discretion when it included appreciation of a farm in the marital estate based on contributions to marriage as a whole rather than the individual contributions of each party.
Where the appreciated value of separate property is due solely to general economic conditions, such a inflation or normal appreciate of real estate values, the property remains separate.
(1) Property gifted by mother in deposit account is not marital. (2) Court cannot consider contingent interest in property inherited after divorce.
(1) Military disability benefits are excluded from division. (2) Money in bank account from disability remains excluded, but exemption was lost once it was invested in mortgage note.
Transfer of inherited property into joint tenancy changes its character and makes such property part of marital estate.
(1) Income from excluded property is not excluded from marital estate. (2) Property brought into marriage not excluded.
1) Husband manifested intent to make a gift by the conversion of his separate property into a joint tenancy with Wife. (2) The trial court erred in failing to include or consider as marital property all of the payments due Husband from the sale of his interest in his former law practice and by the failure to give any value to the physical assets of his new law practice.
(1) Use of gift proceeds to buy household furnishings for family use established donative intent and converts character of gift. (2) Money put into joint accounts become marital.
Where duplex was purchased with inherited funds as down payment and marital funds making mortgage payments, the value in excess of the down payment is marital.
Gifted property remains separate after sales and exchanges where wife did not exercise control over the property.