Don’t Touch That Thermostat!

,

So goodbye, goodbye
I’m gonna leave you now
And here’s the erason why
I like to sleep with the wiodwopen
And you kee0 the window closed
So goodbye
Goodbye
Gooobye

It turns out that thermostat settings are one of the biggest causes of conflict in marriages.  The wrong setting can cause one spouse to be too cold or too hot, and result in talks of divorce.

It’s not just mental either.  Scientists say that women have a lower body mass to surface area, slower resting metabolism and less muscle mass than men.  Therefore, they may feel more comfortable with warmer temperatures.

Financial considerations might come into play as well.  In the summertime, you can save between one to three percent on your air conditioning bill for each degree you set the thermostat over 72 degrees.

/by James J. Gross

Selling Your Engagement Ring

We found another way to raise money for your divorce.  Worthy.com is a website that has online auctions where professional jewelry buyers will bid for the diamond in your engagement ring.

Unlike mining diamonds from the earth, which can harm indigenous peoples and the environment, Worthy.com mines the largest cache of diamonds on earth – us.  After all, there is no physical difference between a new diamond and a used diamond.

Worthy.com will grade your diamond, take pictures and post it for auction.

/by James J. Gross

Crowdfunding Divorce

,

Can’t afford a divorce lawyer?   Need new furniture for your divorce apartment?  Plumfund.com is a website where you can ask people to contribute money for your divorce.

The site describes itself as “Free online crowdfunding for the people we love.”  It has different categories, from baby to funeral, to create a registry for your life events.

You can register your wedding and honeymoon under the Honeyfund category.  I found the divorce requests under “divorce” by using the site search function.

/by James J. Gross

The Motorcycle

, ,

When we were boys, my pal, Jerry, and I built a motorcycle one night. Somehow Jerry had gotten his hands on a motorcycle.  But it was in pieces scattered on the floor of his room. There were no instructions. Only a frame, a motor, gears, cables and hundreds of nuts and bolts. We had screwdrivers and wrenches. And we were young and insane with the possibilities of where that motorcycle could take us if we got it working.

We worked all night on that machine. We built it wrong, tore it down, bolt by bolt, and started over many times that night. We probably built a dozen motorcycles before we got it right.

By morning, we had a motorcycle. It didn’t look like much, but to us it was worth its weight in gold. We took it out for a test drive. That’s when we discovered a major design flaw. At the first stop sign, you had to disengage the clutch with one foot, and press the brake with the other foot at the same time, so there was no foot to put on the ground and hold the contraption upright.

That motorcycle taught me a lot about problem solving.  You have to keep working on it, all night long, if necessary.  This requires patience and persistence, focus and concentration.  You may have to tear down the solution and rebuild it several times to get it right.  Even then you may have to go back to the drawing board in the morning.  I’ve lost many night’s sleep solving chemical engineering problems, briefing cases in law school, and studying tax law. And now I’m solving problems in marriages, divorces and separations.  It’s as complicated as building a motorcycle.

/by James J. Gross

The Phone Call (Part 2)

,

Greg is talking to experienced divorce lawyer, Jeb, about property distribution in a divorce.

“We have separate bank accounts and that $60,000 is in my name alone,” Greg says.

“Doesn’t matter,” Jeb advised, “it’s still marital property.”

“What if I should spend the $60,000 before the divorce?”

“It depends on how you spend it.  If you buy a car or a Rolex, those items become marital property.  If  you buy consumables, then the money is gone and the court can’t divide it.”

“What if I give it to my brother as a gift?”

“That won’t work,” Jeb told him.  “The court can undo that gift.”

(to be continued)

 

/by James J. Gross

English Soccer Star Claims Special Contribution in Divorce

by James J. Gross

Ryan Giggs will ask an English divorce court for more than 50% of millions that he has acquired during his marriage due to his special skills in football, or soccer as we call it in America.  The argument failed last week in Randy Work’s “genius” claim.

We have something similar in Maryland which you can argue if you have made special contributions in your marriage.

In Maryland,when distributing marital property: the court must consider, among other factors;

— the contributions, monetary and nonmonetary, of each party to the well-being of the family.  Section 8-205 (b)(1) of the Family Law Article of the Md. Code

and

— how and when specific marital property or interest in property was acquired, including the effort expended by each party in accumulating the marital property or the interest in property.  Section 8-205 (b)(8) of the Family Law Article of the Md. Code

/by James J. Gross

Genius Argument Fails to Persuade London Courts

by James J. Gross

Randy Work and Mandy Gray married 22 years ago.  Randy  was an executive at Lone Star Funds and their marital estate was worth $225 million dollars by the time they divorced in 2015 in England.  The court split the money equally between

Work appealed and argued that he should receive 61% because of his special contribution.  U.K. judges have distinguished cases where success is of a “wholly exceptional nature” and people who’ve become very wealthy through ordinary means.

The three judge appeal panel ruled against Work, however, and upheld the lower court’s finding that the fortune was the result of “being in the right place at the right time, or benefiting from a period of boom,” not professional genius on the part of Randy.

 

/by James J. Gross

Extra Credit for Being Smart?

,

by James J. Gross

Randy Work, an American financier, is appealing an award that the English Courts made to his wife, Mandy Gray, last year of 140 million pounds, which was half the martial estate.  He claims that he should get two thirds because it was his financial genius that created the wealth.

Under English law, a court can make less than an equal division if it would be unfair to disregard the conduct of one party to the marriage.

In Maryland, the court can adjust the equities of property distribution by making a marital award based on certain factors that must be considered.  One of the factors includes the efforts of each party in accumulating marital property.

But another factor is the contributions of each party, either monetary or non-monetary, to the well-being of the family.  If one spouse took care of the home and children while the other spouse advanced his or her career, who is to say those contributions are not equal?  How would you divide this estate?

 

/by James J. Gross

Maryland Court Rules on Social Security in Pension Case

,

by Michael F. Callahan

The Maryland Court of Appeals has issued its ruling in Milton E. Jackson v Gayle S. Jackson., the case we have been discussing in this last series of articles.

Mr. Jackson was a federal employee with retirement funds under the CSRS system – a large pension, and no social security.  Ms. Jackson was a state government employee – covered by social security and a smaller pension.

Mr. Jackson’s argued that a part of his pension should be treated as social security benefits and not counted when equalizing the pensions of each party.

The Court of Appeals ruled that:

(a)  a state court could not divide social security benefits of a spouse in divorce because federal law establishing social security preempts that.

(b)  The trial court may not calculate and offset the value of a spouse’s future social security benefits from the other spouse’s pension benefits before division of that pension between the spouses in a divorce.

(c)  However, the trial court must consider the spouses’ respective entitlements to social security benefits in determining a martial award as an “other factor” under Maryland divorce law.

So in the end, the Court left a way around the prohibition against dividing or offsetting social security benefits.  It left it to the judge’s discretion to determine a marital award based on “other factors” including social security.  And the judge doesn’t even have to show how the marital award is calculated.   The judge just needs to say that all factors were considered.

 

 

/by Michael Callahan

The Jackson Divorce Case and Social Security Benefits

,

Federal law prohibits the assignment and attachment of social security benefits. What does that mean for your divorce case?

The U.S. Supreme Court had a chance to examine similar provisions regarding railroad retirement benefits in Hisquierdo v Hisquierdo.  In that case, the Court said a state divorce court may not treat railroad retirement benefits as marital property due to federal preemption.  Further the court said the state court could not award an offset against other marital property on account of the benefits.

In Dapp v Dapp, 211 Md. App. 313 (2013). the Maryland Court of Special Appeals (CSA) considered whether a trial court could enforce an agreement dividing Husband’s railroad retirement benefits between the spouses.  The CSA held that the federal legislation referred to above preempted the Maryland divorce court’s jurisdiction and the trial judge had no power to enforce the agreement to divide these benefits.

So will the Maryland Court of Appeals, the states highest court, allow an offset for social security benefits in Milton E. Jackson v Gayle S. Jackson, a case that is currently pending before it? Stay tuned.

/by Michael Callahan