The Second District Court of Appeal issued its ruling today in Fortune v. Fortune, in so doing reversing the lower tribunal for characterizing an advance from the Husband’s business as a marital debt, for failing to award at least nominal permanent alimony to the Wife despite her entitlement to it, for assigning dependency exemptions to the Husband without providing for waivers from the Wife or making the exemptions conditional on current child support, and for failing to restore the Wife’s maiden name despite her request.
Đăng ký:
Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)
Bài đăng phổ biến
-
The Second District Court of Appeal ruled yesterday in Payne v. Payne , a case in which the parties sought dissolution of a seventeen year m...
-
Federal Rule Violation If you have been charged with USCA0024 FEDERAL RULE VIOLATION you can call a Defense Attorney Tampa at 1-877-793-9290... -
In the very long saga of Fort Lauderdale attorney Robert Ingham 's doomed representation of MCS against Essent Healthcare, Judge Seitz ... -
11th Circuit, 11th Schmircuit, that's what I always say. And I see I'm not alone. On Friday in the closely-watched Checking Overdraf... -
I don't know, I feel like we're getting a little Frank Jimenez chronic here, and yet more news keeps breaking. Now it's this , i... -
Here is the Senate Judiciary Committee agenda (there was a live webcast too). From a well-placed source: He finished – no hard questions- ... -
The Second District Court of Appeal ruled yesterday in Zambuto v. Zambuto , reversing the lower court’s ruling on two grounds. The District...
-
Here's an interesting opinion from Magistrate Judge Torres awarding defendants attorney's fees for opposing a copyright infringemen... -
In Atlantic Shores v. 507 South Street Corporation, here's the link , the court held that an objecting neighbor could not litigate a hei...
-
That old W.C. Fields line is ringing in my head, as the wind kicks up and rip tides batter the coast. I have to be honest, with the emerging...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét