When Dissipation Ain't

A very interesting case in Maryland Divorce law that addressed among other issues the matter of a party using marital property, in this case the husband's 401k to pay his counsel fees. As events unfolded in this case the husband actually used the 401k proceeds to pay his counsel fees and a portion of his wife's counsel fees as ordered by the court. The Maryland court determined that the use of marital property to pay reasonable and necessary counsel fees is not a dissipation of marital assets. As such tell your client from now on to stop paying you with their credit cards and start paying you from marital assets. The net effect is the other spouse is also paying you. See Allison v. Allison 160 Md.App. 331, 864 A.2d 191.

All Is Well That Ends

I told you I would follow up on the domestic violence hearing results that had me working on Memorial Day. We won as expected. The case was in the District Court for Baltimore County. The counsel on the other side of the issue attributed the results to the pick of the judge. But I believe any judge would have seen it the way I did. A bruise, the size of a dime, on a 2 year old with no indication of how the bruise got there. As the judge said if everytime one of my kids got a bruise I was investigated by CPS my kids would have been taken away from me. I have some good stuff on my webpage on DV and children testifying. http://www.yourmarylandlawyer.com/Dom%20Violence.htm

It Ain't a Chore If It's Fun Hun

Hello Everyone. I trust you enjoyed the Memorial Day weekend and everyone is safe. I worked most of the day on Memorial Day to prepare for a domestic violence trial on Tuesday morning. This is a case that justice demands I win. Don't worry about my domestic life. I cooked chicken and ribs on Sunday and had a great time with my family around the pool. However, I simply can not sit by and watch as someone tries to use our system of justice as a tool to gain advantage in a custody battle. So I put in the extra time on Monday. Besides all I missed at home was cutting the grass. My Domestic violence case involves a 2 year old child that the x husband claims is being abused by the x wife, my client, since he noticed a bruise on the child's thigh. Yep a bruise the size of a dime on the child's thigh. He admits in his petition he has no idea how the bruise got there, only that is appeared when the child was with the mom. I am sure the case will take about 2 or 3 hours in trial. This is now the second domestic violence petition from the same x husband against the same x wife. The first one as dismissed on the day of trial. I'll let you know how it turns out. Stay tuned.

Uniform Child Custody Act

I have been receiving a lot of calls lately on the subject of one parent leaving the state, Maryland, and relocating in another state with the kids. The questions generally revolve around what state will not have jurisdiction over the custody issues. As life has unfolded the states have adopted the Uniform Child Custody Act. Essentially the act says the state where the kids have lived for the 6 months immedicately prior to the filing of a petition on the issue of custody and visitation will be the state that has jurisdiction. The law makers figure this makes sense since that is the state where all the witnesses and evidence will be generally.

Pre-Marital Financial Contribution to Real Property

Normally Maryland is a Source of the Funds Theory state. Meaning if you had pre-marital money and used it to purchase marital assets, you could get a return of your non-marital investment. This all changes when you are involved in real property that is owed tenants by the entirety's. In this case all the money is marital no matter where the funds originated, and you have to argue for an equitable distribution of the non-marital money. See Gordon v Gordon. This is a subtle but important variation.

Financial Statements

It is often overlooked but could not be more important. I inherited a case from an attorney when her client became dissatisfied with her services. When this gentlemen came to my office he was days before the hearing on pendente lite issues. The financial statement the former attorney had assisted in preparing was inaccurate in terms of expenses and income. For this particular client the impact could have been devastating as he is self employed. The monthly income identified by the former attorney had the client earning $10,000.00 a month. When in fact that figure accounted in large part for payment of his over head cost for the business. You must be extremely causious with financial statements. They are evidence in each case. Be sure the numbers are accurate and verified.