Kronforst v. Kronforst
Profit sharing cannot be included an principal asset in making a division of estate and then also as an income item to be considered in awarding alimony.
Johnson v. Johnson
Where the accounts receivable were viewed as salary, it would have been error to include them in the assets available for distribution.
In Re Marriage of Ondrasek v. Ondrasek
A\R are assets of the service corp. unless excluded by withdrawal agreement. However, double counting of A/R is error.
In Re Marriage of Hubert v. Hubert
Court properly exercised discretion by treating accounts receivable of husband’s medical practice as income, rather than as property. They cannot be counted as both.
In Re Marriage of Maley
Asset and its income stream may not be counted both as an asset in the property division and as part of the payor’s income from which support is paid.
In Re Marriage of Olski v. Olski
Retirement benefit cannot be double counted, but increases because of post-divorce employment is available for post-divorce maintenance.
In Re Marriage of Cook v. Cook
A rule against “double-counting” does not bar consideration of a military pension both as property in the property division and as income in calculating child support.
In Re Marriage of Cook v. Cook
A rule against “double-counting” does not bar consideration of a military pension both as property in the property division and as income in calculating child support.
In Re Marriage of Seidlitz v. Seidlitz
Court’s refusal to double count pension income awarded to wife was proper. The payments to wife represent the payout of the asset itself.
In Re Marriage of Hokin v. Hokin
No absolute rule against double counting. Here, the trial court properly exercised discretion in counting the monthly retirement benefits as income to the wife given the husband’s age.