Charlottesville Divorce Lawyer Rob Hagy

The Virginia Court of Appeals Issued No Published or Unpublished Opinions Today.

Husband Entitled to Modify Spousal Support; Wife Not Entitled to Attorneys Fees.

In the case of Williams v. Williams, the Virginia Court of Appeals, ruled that a husband's motion to reduce spousal support should have been granted where appellant established substantial changes in wife’s financial needs.  The Court then remanded the case to the trial court to determine whether those changes warranted a modification of support.  Wife was not entitled to an award of attorneys fees and the trial court's decision to award attorney’s fees was reversed where the award was contrary to parties’ property settlement agreement.  The parties' property settlement agreement stated that the award of spousal support contained therein was modifiable based upon a substantial change in circumstances".  In the two years since the parties' divorce decree had been entered, wife's wages had increased five-fold, her interest income had increased by 720%.  Furthermore, husband was entitled to argue that interest income should be imputed to wife for her $100,000.00 gift to her adult children.  As for the attorneys fees, the property settlement agreement called for the payment of attorney’s fees in two instances. First, husband agreed to pay a certain sum toward wife’s "legal fees and costs incurred in connection with the preparation of the property settlement agreement and for any action for divorce . . . in accordance with the property settlement agreement." Second, the parties agreed that, in the event either one of them defaulted under the provisions of the PSA, the "defaulting party shall be liable for all expenses.  The parties agreed also agreed subject to the provisions of the property settlement agreement to mutually release each other from "all causes of action, claims, rights, or demands whatsoever . . . ." With provision being made in the property settlement agreement for attorney’s fees in two specific instances, neither of which included an action for modification of spousal support, along with a release of all rights other than those set forth in the property settlement agreement, we must conclude that the trial court erred in awarding wife attorneys fees.

 

Husband Charged With Maliciously Wounding Wife Could Not Object to Evidence He Offered Into Evidence.

In the case of Salahmand v. Commonwealth of Virginia, the Defendant, a husband, waived his right to challenge the admissibility of the criminal complaint as substantive evidence against him where he offered the warrant and complaint into evidence without any limitation.  Further, the evidence was sufficient to support finding he maliciously wounded his wife. The criminal complaint contained statements by wife to the effect that she had been stabbed by the husband.

Father Properly Ordered to Designate Child as Beneficiary of Life Insurance Policy.

In the case of Watson v. Watson, the Virginia Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, ruled that a trial court properly ordered father to designate child of parties as a beneficiary of all or part of his existing life insurance policy.  Virginia Code Section 20-108.1(D) clearly permits this.  The Court would not consider father's argument that such a ruling was "unfair" to father's two other children not related to the mother in this case because he failed to properly preserve the issue on the record at the trial level.

The Virginia Court of Appeals Issued No Published and Four Unpublished Opinions Today.

"The Art of Selling a Home Despite a Marital Split" from the Washington Times.

I just came across this outstanding article today from the Washington Times.  It provides some excellent insight into the challenges divorcing couples face in today's housing market when it comes to the disposition of the marital residence during a divorce.

Fun for Dads and Sons: Remote Control Boats on the Pond at Peter Jefferson Place.

My son and I were walking around the pond at Peter Jefferson Place this evening when we saw a couple of little boys and their parents puttering around the pond with a remote control boat.  My son and I are getting a boat this weekend and giving it a try on our own!  Here is a shot of the pond.

 

 

Annulment Petition Improperly Denied.

In the case of Davidson v. Davidson, the Virginia Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, ruled that the trial court improperly denied a woman's petition to annul her bigamous marriage.  The woman married her husband before his divorce was final, making their marriage a bigamous union.  A bigamous marriage is absolutely void in Virginia.  It didn't matter that the women asked for and received a false marriage certificate from the pastor who performed the marriage ceremony after the marriage ceremony.

No Published and One Unpublished Opinion Issued by the Virginia Court of Appeals Today

Just Days After McNair Death....another Athlete is a Possible Victim of Female On Male Domestic Violence.

Professional boxer, Arturo Gatti, died today and his wife has been charged in his murder.  Click here for more from CNNSI.com.