Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Passage of Time Itself is not Enough to Invalidate a Divorce Agreement and Post Separation Mortgage Payments Entitle Payor to More Equity


Jacobsen v. Jacobsen, 2011 UT App 161 (Utah Court of Appeals, May 19, 2011).
Parties signed a “divorce agreement” in May 2001 and filed for divorce until 2005. The Trial court upheld the agreement. The trial court also awarded Husband a disproportionate portion of the equity because of his use of inheritance and separate income to retire the mortgage after separation. Wife Appealed.
The Court of Appeals found that Wife had marshaled much of the evidence, but failed to illustrate the “fatal flaw.” It is not enough to merely present all the evidence; the appellant must demonstrate why the evidence is insufficient. The Court also found that the passage of time does not invalidate the agreement.
The Court of appeals further found husband’s payments from post separation income and separate property used to retire the mortgage entitled him to a disproportionate amount of equity.
Wife appealed on several other grounds, but failed to preserve some issues and her other arguments were simply not supported by the evidence.
Disclaimer

:: By using this blog site you understand that this information is not provided in the course of an attorney-client relationship and is not intended to constitute legal advice. This blog site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your state.::

COPYRIGHT

:: (c) 2009-2014 D. Grant Dickinson some rights reserved ::