Corliss v. Corliss
It was not error for trial court to refuse to value office equipment by taking into account generation of income tax deductions for depreciation.
In Re Marriage of Gaer
A trial court may deduct a self-employed individual’s depreciation expense in calculating his or her net available income for the purpose of determining spousal or child support.
Overson v. Overson
Inclusion of depreciation upon real estate to determine ability to pay is discretionary. It was payee’s (wife’s) burden to prove tax deduction was only a paper transaction. Here, there was no abuse of discretion in excluding the deduction.
In Re Marriage of Miller v. Miller
Court can consider depreciation costs as business expense as part of the overall economic circumstances in determining income for child support.
In Re Paternity of Ashleigh N. H.
Court did not abuse its discretion by not adding back depreciation to rental properties to determine income available for child support.
In Re Paternity of Steven J.
Court did not misuse discretion by refiguring payor’s income by using MACRS depreciation tables.
Spheeris v. Spheeris
Trial court properly excluded contingent liabilities.
In Re Marriage of Weiss v. Weiss
(1) Debts incurred after start of action do not reduce the marital estate. (2) College expenses for children over 18 is not a joint marital debt.
Marriage of Torgerson v. Torgerson
Trial court is powerless to order husband’s name removed from the mortgage.
In Re Marriage of Laribee v. Laribee
Where husband paid $75,000 to parents just before commencement of divorce action, $30,000 was proper repayment of loan, but trial court properly found that the $45,000 in interest should be returned to the marital estate. No abuse of discretion in not ordering interest on the $45,000 for the time it was in husband’s parent’s possession.