Divorce & Family Law Blog | The Law Corner

Is There a Statute of Limitations for Filing for Contempt in North Carolina? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:19:25 GMT

Precedent Case: State Board of Examiners of Plumbing Heating and Fire Sprinkler Contractors v. Hudson , N.C. App., S.E.2d (May 21, 2025).

The trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss at the close of the evidence because evidence was sufficient to allow a rational juror or trier of fact to conclude defendant violated the injunction issued by the State Board. The trial court retained jurisdiction to enter the final contempt order where defendant’s initial appeal to the court of appeals was inappropriate. Criminal contempt is not a felony or a misdemeanor, and it is not subject to the 2-year statute of limitations applicable to misdemeanors. There is no statute of limitations that applies to criminal contempt.

The plaintiff State Board entered an injunction prohibiting the defendant from engaging in the business of plumbing contracting. A show cause order for criminal contempt was issued based on the plaintiff's allegations that the defendant violated the injunction. A trial was held and the defendant made motions at the close of plaintiff’s evidence and again at the conclusion of the trial requesting that the charge be dismissed for lack of adequate evidence. The trial court denied both motions and concluded the defendant committed criminal contempt. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court filled out and signed a form document titled “Order for Indirect Criminal Contempt Proceeding.” The court checked several boxes on the form and sentenced the defendant to 30 days imprisonment and a $250 fine. Defendant filed a notice of appeal. Approximately one month later, the trial court entered an order which included findings of fact and conclusions of law and ordered the defendant to serve 30 days in jail and pay a $250 fine. The defendant filed an appeal of that order as well.

Defendant first argued that the trial court should have granted his motions to dismiss at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence and the close of all the evidence. The court of appeals reviewed the evidence in detail and held it was sufficient to show the defendant violated the injunction. Defendant then argued that the trial court had no jurisdiction to enter the final order of contempt because of his appeal filed after the trial court signed the form order. The court of appeals held that while an appeal generally divests the trial court of jurisdiction, an inappropriate interlocutory appeal does not. In this case, the form order was not actually an order because it was not filed with the clerk of court. Rule 58 provides that an order is not entered until it is reduced to writing, signed by the judge, and filed with the clerk of court.

The appeal did not divest the court of jurisdiction because the order had not been entered when the appeal was filed. Finally, the court of appeals rejected the defendant’s argument that criminal contempt was barred by the two-year statute of limitations that applies to misdemeanor. The appellate court held that contempt is not a “traditional crime,” and it is not a felony or a misdemeanor. Instead, it is “of its own kind or class” and there is no statute of limitation that applies.

I Paid My Overdue Child Support. Can I Still Be Found in Contempt? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:16:14 GMT

Precedent Case: Bridges v. Bridges , N.C. App. , S.E.2d (May 21, 2025).

The trial court conducted a hearing on plaintiff’s motion for civil contempt and at the end of the hearing, announced that father was in civil contempt for his failure to pay child support and medical expenses. The court also announced that father could purge contempt by paying $3,348.06. The father was immediately incarcerated. He executed a cash bond for the full amount of the purge and was released from incarceration. Approximately 19 days later, the trial court entered a written order, concluding father was in civil contempt and finding that he had complied with the purge ordered. The court of appeals vacated the order, concluding that the trial court erred in holding father in civil contempt after he had complied with the child support order.

For civil contempt, a respondent must be in contempt at the time the order is entered, which means when it is reduced to writing, signed by the court, and filed by the clerk of court.

Can a Judge Hold Me in "Direct Contempt" Just for a Positive Drug Test in Court? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:12:25 GMT

Precedent Case: State v. Aspiote , N.C. App., S.E.2d (May 21, 2025).

Direct criminal contempt The trial court erred when it held defendant in direct criminal contempt after he tested positive for an impairing substance during a criminal court proceeding. Where there was nothing in the record to show defendant lied to the court about taking an impairing substance, or that he was impaired during the proceeding, or that he intentionally caused a delay in the process for testing him for an impaired substance, the trial court erred in concluding defendant committed direct criminal contempt.

The trial court held the defendant in direct criminal contempt after refusing to accept the defendant’s plea in criminal court because the defendant tested positive for drug use during the plea proceeding. The trial court concluded that the defendant caused a delay in the court proceedings by telling the court that he would not test positive for an impairing substance and by intentionally delaying the drug testing process.

The court of appeals reversed the contempt order after concluding that the record showed the defendant admitted to taking an impairing substance on the day of the proceeding, did not say he would not test positive for a substance, and was not impaired during the proceeding. The court of appeals also held that the defendant could not be in direct criminal contempt for intentionally delaying the testing process because the testing occurred outside of the courtroom and outside the presence of the judge.

Civil vs. Criminal Contempt: What Happens When Someone Violates a No-Contact Order? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:09:28 GMT

Precedent Case: Pocoroba v. Gregor , 909 S.E.2d 538 (N.C. App., November 19, 2024).

Trial court erred in holding the defendant in civil contempt for violating a Civil No Contact Order entered pursuant to Chapter 50C where there was no evidence that defendant was violating the order at the time of the civil contempt hearing. Violations of a court order that occurred in the past and that are not continuing at the time of the contempt hearing are punished by criminal contempt rather than civil contempt.

A civil no-contact order was entered pursuant to Chapter 50C which prohibited the defendant from being within 100 feet of plaintiff. The trial court found the defendant to be in civil contempt after determining that he violated the order on two occasions by willfully coming too close to plaintiff. Defendant appealed and the court of appeals reversed the order of civil contempt, explaining that because the purpose of civil contempt is to coerce compliance with a court order, the trial court must find that a defendant is violating the order at the time of the hearing.

Criminal contempt must be used to punish a defendant for past violations of a court order.

How Hard Is It to Invalidate a Prenup in North Carolina? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:07:07 GMT

Precedent Case: Clark v. Clark , unpublished opinion, 910 S.E.2d 449 (N.C. App., January 15, 2025).

The trial court erred in applying the clear and convincing standard of proof to plaintiff’s claim that the premarital agreement between the parties was invalid. In civil matters, the appropriate standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence unless a different standard has been adopted by statute or case law. The trial court denied plaintiff’s request to declare the premarital agreement between the parties void and unenforceable, concluding that “[p]laintiff has not presented clear and convincing evidence to rebut the validity” of the agreement.

Plaintiff appealed and the court of appeals vacated the trial court order and remanded the case, holding that the trial court used the incorrect standard of proof. In civil cases, the standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence “unless a different standard has been adopted by our General Assembly or approved by our Supreme Court.”

I Won My Alimony Appeal. Can I Get My Money Back? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:04:14 GMT

Precedent Case: Du Plessis v. Du Plessis , N.C. App. S.E.2d_(May 7, 2025).

Reimbursement of alimony paid pursuant to an order vacated after appeal The trial court has discretion to order receiving party to reimburse payor for amount paid pursuant to a modified alimony award that was vacated on appeal for a lack of sufficient evidence of a substantial change in circumstances.

A trial court has the discretion to order repayment as a remedy for unjust enrichment. Unjust enrichment results when (1) one party conferred to another (2) a measurable benefit (3) that was accepted (4) but which was conferred neither officiously (5) nor gratuitously. Du Plessis v. Du Plessis, _ N.C. App. _, _ S.E.2d _ (May 7, 2025). The trial court modified an alimony order, increasing plaintiff’s alimony obligation and awarding additional attorney fees. The plaintiff appealed and the court of appeals vacated the modified order. Thereafter, the plaintiff requested that the trial court order defendant to reimburse plaintiff for the amounts paid under the modified order. The trial court held that it lacked authority to order repayment. Plaintiff appealed and the court of appeals vacated the trial court order after concluding that a trial court has the authority “at equity” to allow plaintiff to recover from plaintiff amounts paid under the modification order that was vacated following appeal, and that the trial court has discretion to order reimbursement for unjust enrichment.

The court of appeals also held that all of the elements of unjust enrichment had been established in this case when plaintiff paid to defendant the amount due pursuant to the modified order that was vacated by the appellate court.

My Spouse Ignored My Divorce Filing. Do I Automatically Get an Unequal Property Division? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 23:01:16 GMT

Precedent Case: Arrington v. Arrington , 914 S.E.2d 569 (N.C. App., April 2, 2025).

Effect of default, unequal distribution The trial court did not err in awarding the defendant a larger share of the marital estate even though a default had been entered against him and he had not requested an unequal distribution in his pleadings. A party requesting an unequal distribution has the burden to prove – based on the distribution factors listed in GS 50-20(c) – that an equal distribution is not equitable. However, once that burden is met, the trial court can award a larger share of the marital estate to either party. While the entry of a default prohibits a defendant from asserting a response to plaintiff’s complaint, it does not alter the trial court’s obligation to determine which property is marital, the value that property, and to distribute it equitably.

The plaintiff filed for equitable distribution and requested an unequal distribution. Defendant did not file an answer, did not file an inventory affidavit until shortly before trial, did not respond to discovery and did not respond to discovery requests or participate in discovery or pretrial conferences. A default was entered against him. Both plaintiff and defendant appeared for the ED trial and presented evidence. The trial court classified the marital assets, identified the separate property of the parties, and entered an unequal distribution in favor of defendant. The marital home had been acquired by defendant before marriage but gifted to the marriage shortly before separation. The trial court distributed the home to the defendant along with his 401K. The value of those two assets was more than 50% of the total value of the marital estate. The court of appeals rejected wife’s argument that the trial court erred in awarding the defendant more of the marital estate when he did not specifically request an unequal distribution and a default had been entered against him. The court held that the entry of the default against defendant did not affect the trial court’s obligation to properly “dispose of plaintiff’s claim”. Defendant lost the right to assert a response to plaintiff’s complaint, but it did not relieve the trial court of the obligation to classify and value the property based on the evidence presented by both parties and to decide what constitutes an equitable distribution.

Once plaintiff proved by evidence relating to the distribution factors listed in the statute that an unequal distribution was equitable, the trial court had the discretion to fashion a distribution that was equitable under the circumstances. A trial court’s determination of what constitutes an equitable division of marital assets will be upheld unless shown to be “so arbitrary that it cannot be the result of a reasoned decision.”

I Don't Like My Divorce Arbitration Award. Can I Appeal it in Court? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 22:58:27 GMT

Precedent Case: Gallagher-Masonis v. Masonis , 911 S.E.2d 125 (N.C. App., December 31, 2024).

After an arbitration is conducted pursuant to the Family Law Arbitration Act, GS Chapter 50, Article 3, GS 50-41 et. seq., and an arbitration award is entered by the arbitrator, the role of the trial court is limited. A trial court’s job is to determine whether the arbitrator award should be confirmed, modified, or vacated, pursuant to GS 50-53, 50-54, and 50-55. The trial court has no authority to retry the case. A trial court has the authority to vacate an arbitration award for errors of law only if the parties agreed in their arbitration contract that the court can review errors of law.GS 50 54(a)(8).

Where the parties agreed that errors of law in the arbitration award could be a basis for vacating the arbitration award, the trial court did not err in vacating portion of the equitable distribution award containing a legal error. It was legal error by the arbitrator to distribute the husband’s separate loan debt to him and to order that he pay off the debt earlier than required by the terms of the loan. The arbitrator did not err in failing to consider the capital gains tax consequences from the sale of a house anticipated by the arbitration award when there was no evidence of the tax consequences introduced during the arbitration hearing. An arbitrator’s award cannot be vacated by the trial court for abuse of discretion by the arbitrator. The arbitrator did not err in refusing to impute income to wife in determining alimony and child support where there was no evidence that wife was deliberately depressing her income in bad faith.

After claims were filed by both wife and husband, the parties agreed to submit equitable distribution, alimony and child support to binding arbitration pursuant to the NC Family Law Arbitration Act, GS Chapter 50, Article 3. As part of the arbitration contract, the parties agreed that a trial court could review any alleged errors of law in the final arbitration award. When the arbitrator issued the arbitration award, wife filed a motion requesting that the trial court confirm the award and enter judgment in accordance with the award, and the husband requested that the trial court vacate or modify the award based on his alleged errors of law. The trial court entered judgment vacating portions of the award and confirming the award as modified by the removal of the vacated portions. Both parties appealed.

The court of appeals noted that the Family Law Arbitration Act allows a trial court to vacate an award by an arbitrator only for reasons set out in GS 54(a), which includes errors of law by the arbitrator that prejudices a party’s rights only if the parties agree in the arbitration contract that a review of errors of law is allowed. In this case, the parties agreed to such a review. The trial court vacated two provisions in the arbitrator’s award. The first was a statement by the arbitrator that the arbitrator lacked the authority to order the sale of marital property. The court of appeals did not decide whether this statement by the arbitrator was legally incorrect after concluding that neither party showed how this statement by the arbitrator affected them in the final award. The trial court also vacated a portion of the award dealing with a mortgage debt that the parties stipulated was the separate debt of husband. The arbitrator had ordered that the debt be distributed to the husband and ordered that he make a lump sum payment on the debt after the sale of marital property and ordered that husband pay off the debt entirely by a specific date.

The trial court determined that the arbitrator did not have authority in equitable distribution to distribute separate debt or to order that husband pay the debt in a way not required by the mortgage contract. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, holding that a judge in equitable distribution can distribute marital debt but has no authority to distribute separate debt or to order that a party pay off separate debt. However, the arbitrator did not commit legal error by ordering that husband continue to make the mortgage payments on his separate debt as part of the alimony and child support portion of the arbitrator award. The wife and child resided in the residence encumbered by the mortgage and the arbitrator had the authority to order husband to make the mortgage payments as part of the support order. Husband also argued that the arbitrator erred by failing to consider the capital gains consequences from the sale of a house that was marital property when the sale was anticipated by the arbitration award. The court of appeals held that the arbitrator was not required to consider 24 any tax consequences of the sale when there was no evidence of those consequences introduced during the arbitration.

Regarding the arbitrator’s award for alimony and child support, the court of appeals held that the husband’s alleged errors amounted to an argument that the arbitrator abused her discretion in determining the appropriate amount of monthly support. While the award of the arbitrator can be reviewed for errors of law, the arbitrator award cannot be vacated for an abuse of discretion. Finally, the court of appeals held that the arbitrator did not err in failing to impute income to wife where there was no evidence that she was deliberately depressing her income in bad faith. She stopped working when the child of the parties was born, and she was a stay-at-home mother and homemaker by agreement of the parties.

What is "Invited Error"? How a Mistake in Court Could Hurt Your Divorce Case | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 22:55:49 GMT

Precedent Case: Smith v. Smith , 387 N.C. 255, 912 S.E.2d 762 (2025), affirming, 292 NC App 443 (2023).

A stipulation by the parties is binding on the trial court until the stipulation is properly set aside. A trial judge has discretion to set aside a stipulation when a party makes a timely motion to set aside the stipulation, and the trial court concludes that enforcement of the stipulation would result in injury to one party and the other party would not be materially prejudiced by its being set aside. Grounds to set aside a stipulation include a mistake of material fact, misrepresentation as to a material fact, undue influence, collusion, duress, fraud, and inadvertence. A party cannot complain on appeal about an error by the trial court if the party invited or induced the trial court to make the error. Where the plaintiff's attorney urged the trial court to proceed with the trial without first ruling on the defendant's motion to set aside the stipulation of the parties, the plaintiff was barred from complaining on appeal that the trial court did not rule on the defendant's motion before proceeding to hear evidence contradicting the stipulation.

Before trial of the equitable distribution claims filed by both parties, the parties entered stipulations concerning two pieces of real property. The parties stipulated that the properties were marital property. Defendant subsequently filed a motion seeking to set aside the stipulations, arguing that the properties were his separate property. The trial court did not rule on the motion but later entered a pretrial order stating that the parties disagreed as to the classification of the properties. When the equitable distribution trial began, plaintiff’s counsel acknowledged the defendant's motion to set aside the stipulation but stated “I’m fine with the court just hearing evidence and considering those motions or that motion in relation to those stipulations during the trial.” The trial court conducted the trial and entered a judgment concluding that the properties were the defendant's separate property. The plaintiff argued on appeal that the trial court was bound by the stipulation because the trial court did not set aside the original stipulation that the properties were marital.

The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, deciding that the trial court had in fact set aside the stipulation when it entered the pretrial order stating that the parties disagreed as to the classification of the properties. There was a dissent at the court of appeals and the matter was appealed to the supreme court. The supreme court also affirmed the trial court but on different grounds.

According to the supreme court, the plaintiff “invited error” when the plaintiff allowed the trial court to proceed with the trial on the classification of the properties without first considering the defendant's motion to set aside the stipulation. According to the supreme court, by stating “I am fine with the court just hearing evidence and considering that motion in relation to those stipulations during this trial,” the plaintiff “invited” the trial court to commit the error of proceeding with evidence contradicting the stipulation without formally setting aside the stipulation. A party cannot complain on appeal about an “invited error”.

My Spouse and I Put Property in a Trust. Is it Still Marital Property in a Divorce? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 22:52:38 GMT

Precedent Case: Face v. Face , 909 S.E.2d 521 (N.C. App., November 5, 2024), temporary stay granted, 909 S.E.2d 867 (N.C., January 7, 2025).

The trial court had jurisdiction to issue an “indicative ruling” on a Rule 60(b) motion filed by defendant after he filed a notice of appeal of the equitable distribution judgment. A revocable trust of which the parties were the sole trustees and beneficiaries was revoked when the parties stipulated in the pretrial order that property held in the trust was property owned by the parties and was marital property subject to equitable distribution. Because the trust was revoked by the actions of the parties, the trust was not a necessary party to the equitable distribution proceeding. The trial court erred when it failed to classify the defendant’s share of distributions from an LLC received by defendant after the date of separation as his separate property as provided by an interim distribution order entered earlier in the case.

On the date of separation, the defendant owned a 4.5% interest in an LLC. The parties agreed that the interest in LLC was marital property. Also, on the date of separation, the parties were the sole trustees and beneficiaries of a revocable trust that held title to three properties that had been acquired during the marriage. The existence of the trust was not identified before or during the equitable distribution trial. The pretrial order identified the three properties as property owned by the parties and stipulated that the properties were marital property. An interim order was entered in 2016 that, among other things, distributed the 4.5% interest in the LLC equally between the parties, providing that each party would own 2.25% as their separate property. When the trial court entered the final equitable distribution judgment, the court distributed the three properties between the parties and distributed to wife as her separate property, one-half of distributions paid by the LLC during separation. The trial court classified the other half of the distributions as divisible property and divided them equally between the parties. The defendant appealed the judgment.

Thereafter, the defendant filed a Rule 60(b) motion in which he stated that it had been discovered that the trust held title to the three properties distributed by the trial court. He argued that because the trust was a necessary party to the equitable distribution proceeding, the trial court had no jurisdiction to enter the equitable distribution judgment, citing Wenninger v. Wenninger, 901 S.E.2d 677 (COA, May 2024). The trial court entered an “indicative ruling” denying the Rule 60(b) motion. Indicative rulings are authorized by case law such as Bell v. Martin, 43 NC App 134 (1979). Although the trial court has lost jurisdiction due to an appeal, the trial court can enter an order informing the appellate court how it would rule on the motion if it had jurisdiction to act, thereby 21 allowing the appellate court to determine whether to proceed with the pending appeal or return the case to the trial court.

The trial court determined that, as settlors of the trust, the parties retained the authority to revoke the revocable trust at any point in time, pursuant to the provisions in GS 36C-6-602(c). By stipulating in the pretrial order that the properties held in the trust were properties owned by them and were marital property, the parties had revoked the trust pursuant to GS 36C-6 602((c)(2)(c)(revocable trust can be revoked by “any written method … manifesting clear and convincing evidence of the settlor’s intent.”). The defendant then filed a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Rule 60(b) order. The court of appeals granted cert. to review the indicative ruling on the Rule 60(b) motion, and upon review, agreed with the trial court, ruling that the trust was not a necessary party to the equitable distribution proceeding because the parties had revoked the trust by the stipulations in the pretrial order.

Regarding the equitable distribution judgment, the court of appeals held that the trial court erred in classifying one-half of the distributions from the LLC received by husband during separation as divisible property. Because the interim distribution order classified the ownership interest in the LLC as the separate property of the parties in equal shares, the distributions from the LLC also were the separate property of the parties in equal shares. The portion classified by the trial court as divisible property should have been classified as husband’s separate property.

My Spouse Wasted Marital Assets After We Separated. Can I Get More in the Divorce? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 22:49:45 GMT

Precedent Case: Kaylor v. Kaylor , 907 S.E.2d 758 (N.C. App., October 1, 2024).

The trial court did not improperly consider marital fault when it found as a distribution factor that the defendant wasted and devalued marital assets following separation because of his use of illicit drugs. The trial court could rely on the plaintiff's inventory affidavit as evidence where the defendant failed to participate in pretrial conferences, failed to appear for trial, and failed to object when plaintiff requested during trial that the trial court admit the affidavit into evidence and to accept the facts alleged in the affidavit.

The court of appeals held that the admitted affidavits were, in effect, the pretrial orders of the court, and the trial court could accept the facts to support the findings it made in the final judgment. The trial court did not err by failing to include a finding in the judgment as to the total value of the marital estate when the total value could be easily ascertained based on the findings and conclusions in the judgment regarding the value of the marital property and marital debt.

The plaintiff wife filed this action for equitable distribution and the defendant husband filed an answer. However, he thereafter failed to appear for any scheduling or pretrial conference, failed to file an inventory affidavit, and failed to appear at trial. The trial court entered an equitable distribution judgment, ordering an unequal distribution in favor of the wife. The defendant appealed. Defendant argued that the trial court inappropriately considered marital fault in determining that an unequal distribution was equitable. The trial court found that, because of the defendant's use of illicit drugs, he allowed the marital business to deteriorate during separation and failed to assist plaintiff in paying marital debt during separation. The trial court also found that plaintiff maintained the marital estate during separation by paying the marital debt, including paying the mortgage on the residence where defendant resided during separation. The court of appeals rejected defendant’s argument, pointing to GS 50-20(c)(11a) which allows the trial court to consider “acts of either party to maintain, preserve, develop, or expand; or to waste, neglect, devalue or convert the marital property or divisible property, during the period after separation of the parties and before the time of distribution” as a factor when determining whether the estate should be divided unequally. Because the findings regarding the defendant's drug use related to his failure to preserve marital property during separation, they were not an inappropriate consideration of marital fault.

The defendant also argued that findings made by the trial court regarding the classification of certain property and the value of marital debt were not supported by evidence. The court of appeals rejected this argument as well, finding that the trial court relied on allegations contained in the plaintiff's inventory affidavit to support the findings of fact in the judgment. The affidavit had been introduced at trial with a request by the plaintiff that the facts alleged in the affidavit be 20 accepted. Because the defendant did not object to the introduction and acceptance of the affidavit, the court of appeals held that the trial court properly treated the affidavit as a pretrial order, establishing the facts alleged therein.

Why Was My Request for a DVPO Denied? Understanding the Burden of Proof | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:58:34 GMT

Precedent Case: Shomette v. Needham , N.C. App., S.E.2d_ (April 2, 2025).

While recitations of evidence alone are not appropriate findings of fact, a trial court can describe testimony as part of making findings of fact regarding credibility and resolving disputed issues. The trial court did not err in concluding plaintiff failed to prove defendant committed an act of domestic violence.

The plaintiff and defendant were married. Upon separation of the parties, wife filed a complaint for a DVPO alleging husband had sexually assaulted and raped her approximately 50-100 times throughout their marriage. After a trial during which both parties testified, the trial court concluded that wife failed to prove grounds for a DVPO. Wife appealed. Wife first argued that the following finding of fact was not supported by competent evidence and “merely recited the evidence” and did not serve as an ultimate finding of fact: “[Wife] contends that [Husband] “raped” her 50 to 100 times during their 2-and-a-half year marriage. She described several occasions when she said no and he didn’t stop. [Husband] denies ever continuing to have sex with [Wife] when she told him to stop or pushed him off except when she was saying so while laughing or in a playful manner.

The statutes regarding sexual offenses that are applicable require evidence of by [sic] force and against the will of the victim. The evidence of “against her will” is her saying she said no and him contradicting that evidence saying he never proceeded past a non playful laughing no similar to when they were play wrestling. There is almost no evidence from which the court could find any alleged action was by force. The court, considering all of the evidence and weighing the credibility of each witness, cannot find by the greater weight of the evidence that [Husband] committed an act of domestic violence.”

The court of appeals disagreed with the wife and held that evidence in the record supported everything included in this finding, and that the finding was an appropriate finding. The court of appeals agreed that recitations of testimony and other evidence are not findings of fact, but recitations that include “an indication concerning whether the judge deemed the relevant portion of the testimony credible” are appropriate. The appellate court stated, “there is nothing impermissible about describing evidence, as long as the court ultimately makes its own findings, resolving any material disputes.” While this finding by the trial court set out the conflicting testimony presented by the parties, the finding also addressed the weight and credibility of the evidence and resolved that the evidence was insufficient to meet plaintiff’s burden of proof. The Plaintiff also argued that the trial court should have concluded that the defendant committed an act of domestic violence. The Plaintiff testified extensively about all the times the parties engaged in sexual intercourse. Although the plaintiff testified that she did not consent to the acts, the trial court did not find the evidence sufficient to establish that the defendant forced the plaintiff to have sex. Because the trial court did not make findings that would support the conclusion that defendant committed an act of domestic violence, the trial court did not err in denying plaintiff’s request for a DVPO.

Is My Testimony Enough to Get a DVPO in North Carolina? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:55:31 GMT

Precedent Case: Jay v. Jay , 912 S.E.2d 873 (N.C. App., March 5, 2025).

Sufficiency of evidence to support findings of fact; incorporation of unverified statement of allegations Evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s findings of fact that the defendant committed acts of domestic violence. The trial court did not err by attaching plaintiff’s unverified statement of events to the DVPO where there was sufficient evidence during the trial in addition to the written statement of plaintiff to support the trial court’s findings of fact. Dissent argued that the trial court’s findings of fact were insufficient to support the conclusion that the defendant committed acts of domestic violence. According to the dissent, the incorporation of plaintiff’s unverified statement into the DVPO “was an improper delegation of the trial court’s fact-finding duty.”. 17 Jay v. Jay, 912 S.E.2d 873 (N.C. App., March 5, 2025). The trial court entered a one-year DVPO after concluding the defendant committed acts of domestic violence against plaintiff. The DVPO contained findings on the printed DVPO form order that defendant committed acts in all three categories of domestic violence: intentionally causing bodily injury, placing plaintiff in fear of imminent serious bodily injury, and second-degree rape. The trial court also attached to the DVPO plaintiff’s unverified statement of events that were the acts of domestic violence. The defendant argued on appeal that the evidence introduced at trial was insufficient to support the findings of fact in the DVPO. The court of appeals disagreed, holding that the evidence introduced during the trial that included testimony by both parties about the events at issue was sufficient to support the trial court’s findings of fact. Even if the unverified statement was stricken from the record, the majority held there was sufficient evidence to support the findings of fact in the DVPO. The dissent argued that the findings of fact were insufficient and that the trial court should not have relied on the attached statement as the detailed findings necessary to support the DVPO.

How Do I Renew a Domestic Violence Protective Order (DVPO) in North Carolina? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:50:24 GMT

Precedent Case: Roy obo G.E.M. v. Martin , 911 S.E.2d 501 (N.C. App., February 5, 2025).

A DVPO can be renewed only if the trial court concludes that good cause exists to renew the order and the conclusion must be supported with findings of fact. Where the original DVPO contained no findings of fact and there was no evidence that plaintiff had a legitimate fear of defendant at the time of the renewal hearing, the trial court erred in concluding good cause existed to renew the DVPO.

The court of appeals reversed a trial court’s conclusion that good cause existed to renew a DVPO, holding there was insufficient evidence presented at the renewal hearing to support the conclusion. The original DVPO in that case was entered by consent and contained no findings of fact. The allegations in the complaint requesting the DVPO did not allege the defendant attempted to cause bodily injury or caused bodily injury, but rather alleged defendant’s conduct placed G.E.M., defendant’s teenaged child, in fear of imminent serious bodily injury or continued harassment. The court stated that “[p]er prior North Carolina appellate case law, a showing of good cause [to renew the DVPO] requires the plaintiff to demonstrate the minor child’s continued, legitimate fear of the defendant.”

To support the conclusion that there was good cause to renew the DVPO, the trial court made findings that mirrored the findings of fact made in the original ex parte DVPO entered in the case. Those findings of fact were based on allegations contained in the complaint. In addition, 16 the renewal order contained the findings that the “minor child testified that she remains in fear of defendant”, the “minor child testified that she remains in fear of seeing the Defendant out in public for fear of what he might do or say to her,” and the “minor child testified that she remains afraid of receiving physical harm at the hands of defendant.”

On appeal, the defendant argued there was not competent evidence introduced at the renewal hearing to support the findings of fact and argued that plaintiff failed to show good cause to renew the DVPO. The court of appeals agreed, concluding that there was no evidence introduced at the hearing to support the findings based on the contents of the ex parte order, and concluding that the trial court findings established that the minor child testified about her fear but failed to find that the trial court believed the child was in fear. Noting that a showing of subjective fear, rather than a showing of an objectively reasonable fear, is required for the issuance of a DVPO, the court of appeals held that a trial court’s findings must show that the court believed the plaintiff had an actual fear of the defendant. The mere fact that the child testified that she feared the defendant was insufficient to establish the child’s legitimate, subjective fear. The court of appeals also held that the child’s testimony was “vague” and not “adequate to support a finding that she had a legitimate fear of the defendant.” The child did not testify that she was in fear of the defendant for any of the reasons alleged in the original complaint, included in the ex parte DVPO, or alleged in the motion to renew the DVPO. Instead, she testified that she was “afraid he is going to convince me to come back or he’s going to be sorry or something – he’s best at manipulating,” and that she was afraid he would “listen in on my conversations on my technology and he would, get in my business on technology and stuff.” When asked if she feared physical harm, she admitted that the defendant had never physically hurt her before but that she was “scared that he’s going to get mad at me for doing this and I’m scared he’s going to hurt me or something.”

The court of appeals does not directly address the question of what a plaintiff needs to fear to establish a legitimate fear, but the court does cite as support for its statement that “a DVPO is appropriate in situations where a person attempts to cause bodily injury or intentionally causes bodily injury, or places one in fear of imminent serious bodily injury or continued harassment.” This indicates that a renewal is appropriate if supported with findings of fact indicating that the plaintiff has an actual fear that the defendant will commit or continue to commit an act of domestic violence.

My Ex is Harassing Me Financially and Damaging My Reputation. Can a DVPO Stop This? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:47:11 GMT

Precedent Case: Honacher v. Uhlhorn , 911 S.E.2d 253 (N.C. App., December 31, 2024).

Personal jurisdiction, residence, harassment Defendant waived his right to object to personal jurisdiction when he filed an answer and a motion to dismiss without raising the issue of personal jurisdiction. Rule 12(b). Plaintiff’s testimony that she owned a home in North Carolina and regularly spent time in North Carolina established that she had more than “a mere physical presence” in the state and was sufficient to prove she was a resident of North Carolina. Within the context of Chapter 50B, harassment means knowing conduct, directed at a specific person that torments, terrorizes, or terrifies, and serves no legitimate purpose. A defendant’s conduct is directed at a plaintiff if the conduct induces a third party to act against plaintiff. Trial court findings that defendant harassed plaintiff seeking to recover a portion of the value of a home purchased while the parties lived together when he had no legal claim to the value, causing her financial damage, anxiety and sleeplessness were sufficient to support the conclusion that he committed acts of domestic violence.

The trial court entered a DVPO against the defendant after concluding he committed acts of domestic violence against plaintiff by placing plaintiff in fear of continued harassment that rises to such a level as to inflict substantial emotional distress. Specifically, the trial court found that the defendant contacted numerous third parties such as realtors and government agencies, making complaints about plaintiff and plaintiff’s property for the purpose of harassing plaintiff, and by placing fraudulent liens on plaintiff’s properties, causing plaintiff anxiety, sleeplessness, and financial harm.

The defendant appealed and the court of appeals affirmed the trial court. On appeal, the defendant first argued that because he was not a North Carolina resident and had not been in North Carolina since 2018, the trial court had no basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over him. The court of appeals held that the defendant waived objection to personal jurisdiction when he failed to raise this issue in his answer or in the motion he filed along with his answer requesting that plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Rule 12(b) requires that certain defenses, including a lack of personal jurisdiction, be raised in an answer. The Rule also allows certain defenses designated in the Rule to be raised by a separate motion before an answer is filed. An objection to personal jurisdiction can be raised by a separate pre-answer motion, and a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim also can be raised by separate motion. If a separate pre-answer motion is filed to raise any one of the designated motions, all designated motions must be filed in that motion, or they are waived. Because the defendant did not raise his objection to personal jurisdiction in the motion containing his request that the complaint be dismissed for the failure to state a claim, he waived his right to object to personal jurisdiction. Defendant also argued that the trial court had no subject matter jurisdiction because plaintiff was a resident of Virginia rather than North Carolina. GS 50B-2(a) allows any person residing in North Carolina to request a DVPO pursuant to Chapter 50B.

The court of appeals first held that the defendant has judicially admitted the issue of plaintiff’s residence in the state when he affirmatively alleged in his answer that she was a resident of North Carolina. However, the appellate court also held that plaintiff’s evidence established her residency. She testified that she owned homes both in North Carolina and in Virginia, and that she regularly spent time in North Carolina, The court of appeals acknowledged that the words “resident, residing, and residence’ have no “precise, technical and fixed meaning applicable to all cases.” The court held that the terms “denote something more than mere physical presence, in which event intent is material.” In this case, her evidence that she owned property and regularly spends time in North Carolina established that she had more than a “mere physical presence” here and was sufficient to establish she is a resident. Regarding the conclusion that he committed acts of domestic violence, the defendant first argued that his actions were not harassment within the definition found in GS 14-277.3A because his actions were not directed at the plaintiff. He contacted third parties and did not contact the plaintiff directly.

The court of appeals held harassment is defined in GS 14-277.3A as conduct directed at a specific person that torments, terrorizes or terrifies, and serves no legitimate purpose. Conduct ‘directed at’ a specific person includes communication with third parties intended to induce actions against the plaintiff. In this case, the defendant admitted in his answer and in his counterclaims that he contacted third parties and government agencies to report alleged misconduct on the part of plaintiff and alleged problems with plaintiff’s property. The court of appeals held that these admissions clearly showed that his communications were intended to induce action against the plaintiff. Defendant also argued that his actions were not harassment because he contacted the third parties and government officials for the legitimate purpose of reporting plaintiff’s misconduct and problems with her property.

The court of appeals held that the record supported the trial court’s conclusion that defendant had no basis for his claims against plaintiff; defendant neither appeared in court nor presented witnesses to support his allegations against plaintiff or about plaintiff’s property. Statements in his pleadings supported the trial court’s findings that he acted to harass the plaintiff. Finally, the court of appeals rejected the defendant's argument that plaintiff failed to prove he placed her in fear of continued harassment inflicting substantial emotional distress. The court of appeals stated that the record showed the defendant committed “extortion: he sought to obtain a portion of the value of plaintiff’s home by intimidation and harassment,” causing her to suffer “anxiety and sleeplessness due to [his] continuing, harassing conduct.”

Can I Get a DVPO Against My Ex Who Lives in Another State? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:41:07 GMT

Precedent Case: A.J.Z, a minor by her GAL Demi-Lee Ziegler v. Jay Ziegler , 914 S.E.2d 29 (N.C. App., March 5, 2025).

The trial court did not err when it denied defendant father’s motion to dismiss the Chapter 50B complaints filed against him. His motion was based on his contention that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. The trial court correctly concluded father had sufficient contacts with the state of North Carolina to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him.

To support the exercise of jurisdiction over a defendant who does not reside in North Carolina, the court must find that the defendant has purposefully availed himself of the privilege of conducting activities in the state. The defendant must be aware that he is “establishing a connection with the State of North Carolina. This awareness -whether actual or imputed – is what permits a court in North Carolina to exercise judicial authority over a nonresident defendant.”

Defendant’s alleged domestic violence towards his children who reside in North Carolina, the alleged violence as it pertains to the custody modification action pending in North Carolina and defendant’s participation in that modification proceeding, and defendant’s legal representations in both the custody action and the Chapter 50B 13 proceeding, establish sufficient minimum contacts necessary for the trial court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over defendant father.

Demi-Lee Ziegler is the mother of both plaintiffs minor children. Demi Lee was appointed the GAL for the minor plaintiffs. Mother GAL filed complaints requesting a DVPO pursuant to Chapter 50B on behalf of each minor child against the defendant, the father of the minor children. Mother and the minor children reside in North Carolina because the mother brought the children to this state following her separation from the defendant. The defendant has been to North Carolina to visit the children and to participate in litigation regarding domestic violence and regarding the modification of custody, but he continued to reside in Tennessee, where the parties lived together before the separation of the parents. Defendant father filed motions to dismiss the complaints for a lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing he does not have sufficient contact with the state of North Carolina to support personal jurisdiction over him. The trial court denied his motion and he appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court. The appellate court noted that the presence of defendant’s children in North Carolina, his visitation with them in North Carolina, and his participation in the custody modification proceedings in this state would not be sufficient alone to support the exercise of jurisdiction over him. However, there also were pending DSS actions in this state and in Tennessee regarding the allegations of violence.

The court of appeals held that “by committing actions that may be deemed domestic violence towards his minor children whose custody modification was under consideration by the trial court in this State, and by hiring a North Carolina attorney to represent him in the domestic violence action, Defendant purposefully availed himself of the benefits and protections of the laws of this State.” He could “reasonably foresee that his alleged domestic violence towards his children, in the context of the custody modification action and under North Carolina’s domestic violence statute, would be a necessary consideration for the trial court’s best interest of the child analysis.” The appellate court agreed with the trial court’s conclusion that defendant “could have reasonably anticipated that his actions would connect him to the state.”

What Counts as "Harassment" for a Domestic Violence Protective Order (DVPO) in NC? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:38:18 GMT

Precedent Case: Simpson v. Silver , 909 S.E.2d 360 (N.C. App., November 5, 2024).

Evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s finding of fact that plaintiff suffered substantial emotional distress due to defendant’s continued harassment, which supported the conclusion that defendant committed an act of domestic violence. Defendant failed to preserve his objection to plaintiff’s testimony regarding her panic attacks and eating disorder and failed to make an offer of proof regarding evidence excluded by the trial court, thereby waiving his right to argue about either issue on appeal.

Following trial on plaintiff’s request for a domestic violence protective order, the trial court concluded that defendant committed an act of domestic violence by placing plaintiff in fear of continued harassment that rises to such a level as to inflict substantial emotional distress. This conclusion was supported by findings of fact that defendant threatened to kill plaintiff if she left him, continuously messaged her after she told him not to contact her and threatened to stalk her. The court of appeals rejected the defendant’s argument that evidence was not sufficient to support the findings that plaintiff suffered substantial emotional distress. Plaintiff’s testimony that she was afraid of defendant, that she suffered an eating disorder and panic attacks due to his conduct, and that she had developed hypertension and was “stressed out, overwhelmed, .. unable to eat or sleep … [and] struggling to keep [her] job … because [she] can’t function,” was sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s findings of fact.

I Paid My Child Support Purge Bond. Can the Judge Still Find Me in Contempt? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:35:53 GMT

Precedent Case: Bridges v. Bridges , N.C. App., S.E.2d_ (May 21, 2025).

The trial court erred when it signed and filed an order finding defendant in civil contempt after the defendant paid the entire amount of purge announced by the trial court at the conclusion of the contempt hearing. A respondent must continue to be in civil contempt at the time the trial court enters an order finding respondent in contempt. The trial court conducted a hearing on plaintiff’s motion for civil contempt and at the end of the hearing, announced that father was in civil contempt for his failure to pay child support and medical expenses. The court also announced that the father could purge contempt by paying $3,348.06. The father was immediately incarcerated. He executed a cash bond for the full amount of the purge and was released from incarceration. Approximately 19 days later, the trial court entered a written order, concluding father was in civil contempt and finding that he had complied with the purge ordered.

The court of appeals vacated the order, concluding that the trial court erred in holding father in civil contempt after he had complied with the child support order. For civil contempt, a respondent must be in contempt at the time the order is entered, which means when it is reduced to writing, signed by the court, and filed by the clerk of court.

My Ex Quit a High-Paying Job. Can a Judge Still Make Them Pay Support Based on Their Old Salary? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:33:06 GMT

Precedent Case: Keith v. Keith , 911 S.E.2d 371 (N.C. App., December 31, 2024).

Findings of fact by the trial court were sufficient to support the conclusion that defendant intentionally depressed his income in deliberate disregard of his support obligation and to support the amount of income imputed to defendant. Prospective support is payable from the date the complaint or motion for support is filed. The trial court can order a different starting date for prospective support, but to do so is a deviation from the child support guidelines and must be supported with sufficient findings of fact. Findings must show that the deviation is based on the financial circumstances of the parties and sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of the children. A child’s summer camp fees may fall within the category of extraordinary expenses that can be allocated between the parents when the trial court makes findings that the expense is reasonable, necessary, and in the child’s best interest.

The defendant father appealed a trial court support order that imputed income to him after concluding that he acted in bad faith and that also ordered him to reimburse plaintiff mother for a portion of summer camp expenses she paid for one of the children. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision to impute income and affirmed the amount of income imputed, concluding that the trial court’s findings of fact were sufficient to support both. The court of appeals held that, when considering whether a parent has acted in bad faith, “the dispositive issue is whether a party is motivated by a desire to avoid his reasonable support obligations.” The court noted that a party’s motivation is generally proved by circumstantial evidence. In this case, the trial court findings showed the father intentionally left his employment after the parties separated to start his own business, and despite the success of the business, he refused to pay himself a salary “commensurate with his experience and earning potential”. In addition, the defendant father stated that he did not believe he should be required to pay support because the mother earned more than he earned and he shared custody of the children. These findings supported the trial court’s finding that he intentionally reduced his income in disregard of his child support obligation. The amount of income imputed to the defendant was supported by findings regarding the defendant’s earnings during the marriage and findings regarding how much he paid an employee of his new business. The trial court ordered prospective support and ordered that it be paid by defendant monthly beginning July 2019. Because plaintiff filed the complaint for support in August of 2017, the court of appeals held that the trial court “deviated from the Guidelines” which provides that prospective support begins at the time the request for support is made. Noting that the trial court “presumably” entered this order because there was evidence that father paid support to mother until July 2019, the court of appeals held that a deviation requires findings of fact.

Required findings include a determination “that deviating from the Guidelines would be appropriate to meet the reasonable needs of the children and the parents’ relative ability to pay, and that the presumptive amount of child support under the Guidelines would be inadequate, excessive, or otherwise inappropriate.” The trial court then needs to make findings to show the support ordered – or not ordered as in this case – was sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of the children considering the ability of the parents to pay during the time of the deviation. Because the child support order did not contain these required findings, this issue was remanded to the trial court. The court of appeals also remanded an issue related to the trial court’s order that father reimburse mother for a part of the amount she paid for one of the children to attend summer camp. The court of appeals held that amounts paid for summer camp can be allocated as an extraordinary expense if the trial court determines the amounts were reasonable, necessary, and in the child’s best interest. As the support order did not contain these findings, the issue was remanded to the trial court.

I'm Self-Employed. How Will a Judge Calculate My Income for Child Support? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:30:31 GMT

Precedent Case: Mecklenburg County, o/b/o. Herron v. Pressley , 910 S.E.2d 698 (N.C. App., December 17, 2024).

Child support is set based on a party’s actual income at the time the child support order is entered or modified. Income from self-employment is defined by the Child Support Guidelines to mean gross income minus ordinary and necessary business expenses. Straight-line depreciation may be a necessary business expense unless the trial court determines otherwise. The Guidelines provide that amounts allowable by the IRS for the accelerated component of depreciation expenses, investment tax credits, and any other business expense determined by the trial court to be inappropriate for determining gross income, are not business expenses deducted from gross income. The trial court order did not contain sufficient findings of fact to allow the appellate court to determine how the trial court considered the depreciation claimed on the defendant's tax returns.

The defendant's father is a self-employed dump truck owner and operator. The trial court used the defendant's income tax returns to determine his gross income but declined to consider the depreciation shown on the returns as a necessary business expense. The trial court added the deduction for depreciation back into the defendant's gross income.

On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court failed to make sufficient findings of fact to support its decision to not allow the depreciation expense and the court of appeals agreed. The court of appeals explained that accelerated depreciation cannot be considered in the determination of gross income of a self-employed person because it is prohibited by the Child Support Guidelines. The trial court has the discretion to determine whether straight-line depreciation is an ordinary and necessary business expense, but the trial court must make sufficient findings of fact to allow appropriate appellate review.

The court of appeals held that the trial court order in this case did not contain sufficient findings to allow the appellate court to determine whether the depreciation was not allowed because the trial court determined it was accelerated depreciation, or whether the trial court found it to be straight-line depreciation that the trial court determined was not an appropriate business expense. The court of appeals remanded the case to the trial court for additional findings of fact.

Can I Pay Child Support Directly, or Does it Have to Come From My Paycheck? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:27:46 GMT

Precedent Case: Price v. New Hanover County Child Support , intervenor, o/b/o Murray-Price, unpublished opinion, 909 S.E.2d 805 (N.C. App., December 31, 2024).

Wage withholding Wage withholding is mandatory in all child support orders entered in IV-D cases. The trial court did not have discretion to allow plaintiff to make direct payments to defendant mother even though he did not have a history of nonpayment, or of erratic payments, and no arrears were owed, where mother was represented in the action by the IV-D child support agency. Price v. New Hanover County Child Support, intervenor, o/b/o Murray-Price, unpublished opinion, 909 S.E.2d 805 (N.C. App., December 31, 2024). The intervenor child support agency appealed the trial court’s order that plaintiff father’s child support obligation could be paid directly to mother rather than being subject to wage withholding. The trial court made findings that father had paid timely support to mother in the past, did not make erratic payments in the past, and did not owe arrears.

The court of appeals vacated the order and remanded the case to the trial court, holding that three statutes, GS 110-136.3(a), 110-136.3(b)(1), and 110-136.4(b), and case law provides that when a IV-D agency is involved in the child support case, wage withholding is mandatory.

I Filed to Modify Child Support. When Does the New Amount Actually Start? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Thu, 20 Nov 2025 04:24:25 GMT

Precedent Case: Crenshaw v. Crenshaw , 907 S.E.2d 743 (N.C. App., October 1, 2024).

Effective date of modification; attorney fees In a case where the trial court deviated from the Child Support Guidelines, the trial court had the discretion to set the effective date of the new modified order on a date other than the date a motion to modify was filed. Where the trial court ordered father to pay attorney fees based on its finding that he filed several frivolous discovery motions, the trial court was not required to make findings that mother was a party acting in good faith with insufficient means to defray the cost of the litigation.

Father filed a motion to modify support when two of the three children of the parties reached the age of 18. Mother also filed a motion to modify, requesting that support be increased due to an increase in the needs of the one child under the age of 18 and an increase in father’s income. The trial court determined that it was appropriate to deviate from the Guidelines, made numerous findings about the needs of the child and the financial circumstances of the parents, and increased the father’s child support obligation. The trial court ordered that the modified support order be effective January 1, 2022, instead of the date that either parent filed their motion to modify. The trial court also ordered the father to pay $15,000 in attorney fees to the mother. Both parents appealed.

The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, holding that the amount of support set by the trial court was supported by sufficient findings of fact that were adequately supported by the evidence. The appellate court rejected mother’s argument that the trial court erred by not making the new support order effective as of the date she filed her motion to modify. The court of appeals held that, while a trial court cannot modify a support obligation as of a date before the date of the filing of a motion to modify, the court has discretion to set an effective date after a motion is filed that the trial court determines is reasonable under the circumstances. The court of appeals held that the findings in the order showed that the trial court properly considered all the factors in the case when determining the effective date and did not enter an order that was “unsupported by reason.” Father argued on appeal that the trial court order for attorney fees was improper in that the order contained no findings that the mother had insufficient means to defray the cost of litigation as required by GS 50-13.6. The court of appeals rejected this argument, concluding that the trial court ordered the payment of fees because it found that father had filed a significant number of frivolous discovery motions, causing unnecessary expense to mother. The court of appeals held that GS 50-13.6 does not require findings regarding the ability of the party to pay the cost of litigation when fees are awarded based on a finding that “the supporting party has initiated a frivolous action or proceeding” and the amount awarded will be as the trial court deems “appropriate under the circumstances.”

The Judge Recused Himself: Does My Custody and Support Case Have to Start Over? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:17:17 GMT

Precedent Case: Green v. Branch , N.C. App., S.E.2d (May 7, 2025).

Jurisdiction of the court after a recusal order is entered The trial court judge did not have jurisdiction to enter an order resolving matters tried by the judge because he had previously signed an order recusing himself and assigning the case to another judge. Where the trial judge recused himself before entering the written order resolving matters he tried before signing the recusal order, the case had to be retried before a new judge. The trial judge heard evidence in a case concerning custody and child support. After the conclusion of the evidence, he ordered that defendant’s attorney draft an order reflecting his oral ruling. Thereafter, the trial judge granted the plaintiff’s motion that he recuse himself and entered an order recusing himself and assigning the case to another judge.

Sometime after entry of the recusal order, the trial judge signed the written order resolving the custody and support matters. The plaintiff appealed that order. The court of appeals held that the trial judge did not have jurisdiction to enter the custody and child support order because he had recused himself from the case after the conclusion of the evidence but before entry of the final written order.

The custody and child support orders were vacated and remanded to the trial court, with instruction that a new trial be held before a different judge. As the judge who heard the evidence had not made findings of fact based on that evidence before recusing himself, no other judge could enter an order resolving the matters on the evidence originally presented to the court.

What is a Parenting Coordinator? A Solution for High-Conflict Custody Cases in NC | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:13:42 GMT

Precedent Case: Riggan v. Andrews , N.C. App., S.E.2d (May 7, 2025).

Order denying appointment of parenting coordinator; Rule 11 sanctions The trial court order denying mother’s request for the appointment of a parenting coordinator and granting father’s request for Rule 11 sanctions contained insufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law. While there is no requirement that a trial court make findings on factors set out in GS 50 91 when denying a request for the appointment of a parenting coordinator, Rule 52 of the Rules of Civil Procedure requires that the trial court make findings and conclusions necessary to address the issues before the court. In a case that the parties agreed was a high-conflict case, mother requested that the court appoint a parenting coordinator. Father argued that mother made the request in bad faith, seeking only to retaliate against his motions for contempt filed against her. The trial court denied the request for a PC and imposed Rule 11 sanctions against mother, finding that mother’s motion was filed in retaliation for father requesting that the trial court hold mother in contempt for interfering with his visitation as allowed by the custody order. The trial court did not make findings or conclusions regarding mother’s request for a PC.

Mother appealed and the court of appeals held that the trial court order appeared to address only father’s request for Rule 11 sanctions. While a trial court is not required to make findings to support a denial of a request for a PC, the court of appeals held that in this case, ‘based upon the findings that were made even more than those that were missing, it appears the trial court was viewing the need to punish Mother for her actions regarding the previous order rather than [making] a reasoned decision of whether a parenting coordinator would serve as a means of reducing the conflict between the parents thereby benefiting the child at issue, whose wellbeing should be the primary focus.”

The court of appeals remanded the matter to the trial court with instructions that the trial court make findings of fact and conclusions of law to support both the ruling on sanctions and the ruling on the request for the PC.

Why Your Private Custody Agreement Isn't Enforceable (And How to Make it Legal) | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:11:07 GMT

Precedent Case: Bossian v. Chica and Bossian , 910 S.E.2d 682 (N.C. App., December 17, 2024).

Mother had the right to primary physical custody of child pursuant to a court order even if the parties agreed in writing after the entry of the order that child would live with father. A custody order remains in effect until modified by the court, and parties cannot affect custody rights granted by that order by private contract. The North Carolina Supreme Court has not recognized the tort of intentional interference with parental rights. The trial court failed to make sufficient findings of fact to support an order of sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

A custody order granted joint legal custody to mother and father, and primary physical custody to mother with visitation to the father. After the order was entered, father alleged the parents entered a written contract, executed before a notary, agreeing that the child of the parties would reside with father in Rhode Island. After the execution of that contract, the child lived with father in Rhode Island for two years, then returned to live with mother and defendant Chica in North Carolina. The child never returned to Rhode Island. Father filed this action alleging tortious interference with parental rights against mother and defendant Chica and tortious interference with contract against defendant Chica, arguing that the two defendants intentionally induced the minor child to leave Rhode Island and take up residence in North Carolina.

The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim and granted Rule 11 sanctions against the plaintiff. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim, holding that North Carolina has not recognized the claim of tortious interference with parental rights. The majority also held that even if North Carolina recognized such a tort, mother had the right to custody of the child pursuant to the court order. Parties cannot modify or alter custodial rights granted by a court order; only a court can modify a court order. Similarly, the court of appeals held that father failed to state a claim for tortious interference with a contract against defendant Chica because the contract between mother and father was not a valid contract. As parties cannot modify custody rights granted by a court order, a contract was not an enforceable agreement.

The court of appeals remanded the case to the trial court for further findings of fact to support Rule 11 sanctions. Sanctions may be granted against a person who signs a complaint that is not well grounded in law or fact, or that was filed for an improper purpose or harassment. The court of appeals held that a dismissal for failure to state a claim is not sufficient alone to support the imposition of Rule 11 sanctions. The court of appeals held that while there was evidence in the record that might establish grounds for Rule 11 sanctions, the judgment of the trial court did not contain sufficient findings to support the trial court’s order.

Is My "Temporary" Custody Order Now Permanent? The Risk of Waiting Too Long | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:08:26 GMT

Precedent Case: Ludack v. Ludack , 910 S.E.2d 720 (N.C. App., December 17, 2024).

Sufficiency of findings to support best interest determination; delay in entry of order; temporary v permanent order GS 50-13.2(a) requires that the court make written findings of fact to show the trial court considered evidence of acts of domestic violence between the parties as well as the safety of the child and the parties, and to support the trial court’s determination of what is in the best interest of the child. Findings of fact reflecting each parent’s personal relationship with the child, each parent’s ability to financially provide for the child, each parent’s housing circumstances, the amount of time and kinds of activities each parent usually has with the child, and each parent’s ability to spend time with the child with respect to their work schedule were sufficient to support the trial court’s decision regarding the best interest of the child. The above findings, along with findings regarding the fitness of the school in mom’s district supported the trial court’s determination that it would be in the best interest of the child to reside with mother during the school week.

There is no statutorily mandated time within which an order must be entered following a custody trial. However, a trial court is obligated to enter an order and custody orders must reflect the best interest of the child at the time of the custody trial. When a party would like to hold a trial court accountable for the failure to enter a custody order in a timely manner, the party must seek a writ of mandamus or request a hearing in the trial court on the issue of entry of the order. A party cannot complain on appeal about prejudice resulting from delay in the entry of an order unless the party has first taken steps in the trial court to have the order entered in a timely manner.

A temporary order may become permanent by operation of time, when neither party sets the matter for hearing on the issue of permanent custody within a reasonable time. What constitutes a reasonable time is a fact-specific question to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. The custody order in this case was remanded to the trial court to determine whether the twenty-five-month period between entry of a temporary order and mother’s request for a permanent custody trial was reasonable under the circumstances.

Father filed a complaint for custody and the parties agreed to the entry of a temporary custody order. Twenty-five months later, mother requested that a trial date for the issue of permanent custody be set. The trial was held but the order for permanent custody was not entered until thirty-eight months following the trial. The trial court granted joint legal and physical custody to both parents with mother having primary physical custody and father having physical custody every other week from Thursday through Sunday. Father appealed. Father first argued that the custody order did not contain sufficient findings of fact to support the allocation of physical custody between the parents.

The court of appeals disagreed, holding that while findings must show more than the fitness of each parent, the order in this case was sufficient to show both the fitness of the parents and the reasons why the order of the trial court was in the best interest of the child. Father also argued that the delay of over three years in the entry of the custody order following trial was a prejudicial delay. The court of appeals, adopting the reasoning of the North Carolina Supreme Court in cases addressing delay in the entry of orders in termination of parental rights cases, held that a party must address the issue of delay in the trial court by either requesting a writ of mandamus or requesting a hearing before the trial court to address entry of an order. The court of appeals noted that, in this case, the parties had been before the trial court on several occasions during the three-year period without addressing the issue of entry of the custody order. The appellate court held that a party cannot raise the issue of prejudice on appeal if the party has not tried to first address the issue in the trial court. Finally, father argued that the temporary order became a permanent order by operation of time when it was left in effect for twenty-five months before mother requested a trial on permanent custody. Because it became a permanent order, father argued the trial court was required to find there had been a substantial change in circumstances before ordering the new custodial arrangement.

The court of appeals held that the determination of whether a party requested a permanent custody trial within a reasonable time following the entry of a temporary order is a factual determination to be made on a case-by-case basis. Because the trial court did not address this issue, the case was remanded to the trial court for the trial court to determine whether the temporary order became a permanent order by operation of time.

Spouse Filed for Divorce in the Wrong County: A Costly Procedural Mistake to Avoid | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:05:11 GMT

Precedent Case: Braswell v. Braswell , 910 S.E.2d 359 (N.C. App., December 3, 2024).

Waiver of objection to improper venue by filing noncompulsory counterclaims Defendant husband/father waived his objection to improper venue by filing noncompulsory counterclaims after he filed an objection to venue but before the trial court ruled on his motion to change venue. The plaintiff mother filed a complaint in Wake County seeking child support, PSS and alimony, equitable distribution, and asking to set aside a premarital agreement. Defendant father filed a timely objection to venue, arguing that mother and child lived in Wayne County and father lived in Johnston County.

The defendant scheduled a hearing on his motion to change venue. One month after filing his objection to venue but before the hearing on his motion, defendant father filed an answer and other motions, as well as counterclaims for equitable distribution and custody. The trial court determined that father waived his objection to venue by filing the noncompulsory 4 counterclaims, and the court of appeals agreed, with a dissent by Dillon.

According to the majority opinion, objection to improper venue can be waived either by failing to raise a timely objection to venue or by participating in the litigation even after raising an objection. By asserting claims as counterclaims that were not compulsory counterclaims but could have been asserted in another way (by separate action or by motion in the cause in another proceeding), defendant father waived his objection to improper venue.

When Can Relatives Get Custody? Understanding Third-Party Standing in North Carolina | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 04:01:36 GMT

Precedent Case: Ledford and Ledford (maternal cousins) v. Ledford (maternal grandmother) v. Burrell (father) and Burrell (mother) , 910 S.E.2d 284 (N.C. App., December 3, 2024).

Maternal cousins established standing to seek custody when they alleged a parent-like relationship with the child and alleged facts to support a conclusion that the parents had waived their constitutional right to custody.

Mother appealed the trial court order granting maternal cousins primary physical and legal custody of the child, granting grandparent visitation to maternal grandmother, and denying visitation to both parents except as allowed by the maternal cousins.

Mother argued that the order was void because she had not been served with a summons in the custody action and because the maternal cousins lacked standing to seek custody. The court of appeals rejected mother’s arguments and affirmed the trial court. Mother waived all objection regarding service of process when she appeared in court and participated in the custody proceedings without raising an objection to service.

The third-party maternal cousins established standing to seek custody when they alleged that they had acted as parents to the child and alleged that the parents of the child had waived their constitutional right to custody by acting inconsistent with their protected status as parents. The maternal cousins alleged that mother had placed the child at risk of substantial harm by her repeated and continuous use of illicit drugs.

How a Judge's Findings on Domestic Violence Can Determine Child Custody | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 03:57:40 GMT

Precedent Case: Efstathiadis v. Efstathiadis , 909 S.E.2d 737 (N.C. App., December 3, 2024).

Sufficiency of evidence to support findings, sufficiency of findings to support best interest determination Evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s findings of fact. Findings of fact regarding defendant father’s acts of domestic violence were sufficient to establish his fitness as a parent and were sufficient to support the trial court’s order of primary legal and physical custody to mother.

Father appealed the trial court order of primary legal and physical custody to mother, arguing that evidence was not sufficient to support the trial court’s findings of fact and that the findings were not sufficient to establish his fitness as a parent and to support the determination of the child’s best interest.

The court of appeals disagreed and affirmed the trial court. Mother’s testimony regarding father’s acts of domestic violence against her and the child, as well as the DVPO between the parties admitted into evidence during the custody trial, and a safety plan created by DSS also admitted into evidence during the trial was sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s findings related to defendant’s fitness as a father and to the trial court’s determination that the order of primary legal and physical custody the mother was in the best interest of the child.

My Child's Other Parent Got a Custody Order in Another State. Is it Valid in North Carolina? Which State has Jurisdiction? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 03:53:43 GMT

Precedent Case: In the Matters of B.E., L.E., L.E., C.W., F.W., B.W. , 909 S.E.2d 505 (N.C. App., November 5, 2024).

The trial court properly declined to recognize a previous custody order entered in Virginia where the order was entered in Va. when North Carolina was the home state of the children. A custody order not entered in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (the UCCJEA, Chapter 50A in NC) and the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (the “PKPA”) is not enforceable or entitled to Full Faith and Credit.

The court of appeals addressed an important issue relating to the subject matter jurisdiction of the court to make a child custody determination. The mother argued that the NC court did not have subject matter jurisdiction in the juvenile case because a court in Virginia previously had incorporated a separation agreement into a divorce degree and the agreement contained provisions relating to custody of several of the children at issue in this case. The trial court and the court of appeals disagreed, holding that because NC was the home state of the children at the time the agreement was incorporated into the divorce judgment, the Virginia court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to make a child custody determination. Because the order was entered without jurisdiction, the NC trial court was not required to consider the Va order in the juvenile case.

The NC UCCJEA and the Va UCCJEA both give the home state priority in making initial custody determinations, in compliance with the federal PKPA. The court of appeals rejected the mother’s argument that while Va. did not have home state jurisdiction at the time the agreement was incorporated, that state did have significant connection/substantial evidence jurisdiction. Both the UCCJEA and the federal PKA allow the use of significant connection/substantial evidence jurisdiction only when there is no home state.

Postnuptial Agreement must be "Fair" at the time of Divorce | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:40:56 GMT

A postnuptial agreement is similar to a prenuptial agreement – it sets out what each person is entitled to if the marriage fails. The difference is that a postnuptial agreement is signed after the wedding has taken place.

Postnuptial agreements are legally valid in North Carolina. But in general across the Unites States, they’re not foolproof, and sometimes a spouse can avoid their terms – especially if those terms just don’t seem particularly fair. For instance, the Connecticut Supreme Court recently refused to enforce a postnuptial agreement that a couple had signed back in 1989.

Under that contract, the wife had agreed to accept $75,000 as a cash settlement of any alimony claim if the couple split up, and gave up any rights to her husband’s car-wash business.

However, by the time the couple divorced in 2007, the car-wash business had taken off, and the amount the wife was entitled to under the agreement now represented only a small portion of the couple’s assets.

The wife argued that postnuptial agreements should be invalid in general. The court didn’t go that far. It said that postnuptial agreements are okay… as long as they’re fair to both people at the time they’re signed, and as long as the terms are still “conscionable” at the time of a divorce.

But in this case, the court said the terms were totally unfair at the time of the divorce, because the wife would get only $75,000 even though the couple’s assets were now worth nearly $1 million. It begs the question, what would happen in North Carolina if someone were willing to take it to our Court of Appeals or our Supreme Court?

Need help? Our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC have answers and can help you navigate the division of property, assets, and debts . Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Couples Must Obey Separation Agreement | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:40:05 GMT

Even if the circumstances change...

A typical separation agreement may include a division of property , alimony , and child custody . In many cases, the alimony and custody rules can be modified at a later date if circumstances change. However, a property division usually can’t be modified – even if unforeseen circumstances mean that one spouse got a much better (or worse) deal than anybody expected.

For instance, when an Alaska couple split up, they had to figure out how to divide some stock that they jointly owned in two companies. They decided that the husband would get the stock, and he’d pay his wife a total of $50,000 for it in a series of installments over time.

Eventually, the husband fell behind on the payments, and the wife sued.

The husband argued that he shouldn’t have to pay the rest of the $50,000, because the companies weren’t profitable, the value of the stock had declined, and his shares were no longer worth $50,000.

But the Alaska Supreme Court sided with the wife. It said the couple had both agreed on the value of the stock at the time of the divorce, and they both bore the risk that they might be wrong. It noted that the husband would have to pay the same $50,000 regardless of whether the stock turned out over time to be worthless or to be worth a fortune.

In another case in Georgia, a divorcing husband agreed that he would refinance the couple’s home by a certain date in order to remove his wife from the mortgage. This was done so the wife would have an easier time obtaining a mortgage for a house of her own. The couple’s agreement said that if the husband didn’t refinance by a certain date, he’s have to pay his wife a $10,000 penalty.

However, shortly afterward the bottom fell out of the real estate market, and despite his best efforts, the husband wasn’t able to refinance in time. The wife demanded $10,000.

A judge initially gave the husband more time, saying the soft real estate market wasn’t his fault.

But the Georgia Supreme Court overruled the judge and ordered the husband to pay the penalty. The court said the agreement meant what it said, and since there was nothing in the agreement that conditioned the $10,000 payment on the real estate market remaining strong, the husband was on the hook for the money.

Sometimes it’s not clear whether something in a divorce agreement is about support or property division and, therefore, whether it can be modified later. For instance, in a recent South Carolina case, a divorcing husband was required to pay for health insurance for his ex-wife until she either remarried or obtained employer-based coverage. Six years later, after the husband lost his job and suffered a disability, he asked a court to end this requirement. The wife argued that the health insurance clause couldn’t be modified. But the South Carolina Supreme Court agreed said that the obligation to pay for health insurance was “support,” not a division of property, and therefore it could be modified if circumstances had changed.

Have questions? Our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC can help you with a separation agreement . Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Who’s getting Married? Who’s getting Divorced? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 03 Aug 2020 14:37:32 GMT

The U.S. Census Bureau has gone back through its data from the 1940s to the present, and has compiled a new report analyzing marriage and divorce in America. Who’s getting married? Who’s getting divorced? And how are the answers changing over time?

One of the most interesting findings is that the divorce rate has started to level off and decline. But that’s not necessarily because couples are more likely to stay together for life. Rather, a lot of couples are simply not getting married in the first place, so that when they split up, it doesn’t result in a divorce.

The findings:

People are waiting longer to get married . Back in the 1950s, the median age for a first marriage was 23 for men and 20 for women. By 2009, though, the median age had risen to 28 for men and 26 for women.
More people are not getting married at all . As recently as 1986, 73% of women had gotten married before they were 30. By 2009, that figure had fallen to only 53%. Similar declines were registered for other age groups. For instance, in 1986, only about 3% of women reached age 55 without having gotten married. By 2009, that figure had tripled to more than 10%.
The figures are similar for men . Among men born in the early 1940s, two-thirds had gotten married by age 25, and 87% had gotten married by 35. But among men born in the early 1970s, only 36% had married by 25, and only 70% had married by 35.
The well-off are getting married . According to the study, marriage increasingly correlates with having more education and a higher socioeconomic status.
Divorce rates are leveling off . It appears the divorce rate in the U.S. peaked in the early 1980s. This was shortly after most states loosened their laws to make divorce easier, by no longer requiring people to prove in court that the other spouse had committed adultery or cruelty or was otherwise at fault.
Since then, there has been a slow decline in the divorce rate . For instance, in 1996, among women ages 25-29 who had ever been married, some 19% had been divorced. But by 2009, the number had fallen to 14%. Among women ages 30-34, the number dropped from 26% to 21%. Among men born in the early 1940s, less than 12% had been divorced by age 30. Among men born in the early 1950s, the figure shot up to about 15%. But among men born in the early 1970s, the figure declined to about 10% – meaning that men born in this era were less likely to divorce than their fathers.
More than one in five Americans is divorced . Overall, including all American adults and not just those who have been married, some 21% of men and 22% of women have been through a divorce.
The median age for divorce is 32 for men and 30 for women .
Twelve percent of American adults have been married twice, and 3% have been married more than twice . The median age for remarriage is 36 for men and 33 for women.
There really is a "seven-year itch." Among marriages that end in divorce, the median time period between marriage and separation is seven years . Interestingly, among second marriages that end in divorce, the median time period from marriage to separation is once again about seven years.
Interracial marriages have increased . Some 23% of American women of Asian descent are married to someone from a different ethnic group, according to the study. The figures are 11% for Hispanic women, 7% for black women and 5% for white women.
Interracial couples have a higher divorce rate than other couples , the study noted.
American divorce rates are still higher than most European divorce rates , according to the study.

Need help? Contact our team of attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Monster-In-Laws | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 06 Jul 2020 16:34:00 GMT

In many families, the mother-in-law is jokingly referred to as the “monster-in-law.” Yet, the strain that parents-in-law can place on a couple is no laughing matter. It can, in fact, ultimately destroy a relationship. If your own situation is causing you anguish, learning how to manage your feelings and the situation is critical in taking care of your well-being and ultimately, your family’s. "I hate my mother in law" is a common topic of discussion amongst many generations and the same goes for "I hate my father in law" as well. And although a toxic mother in law may not be the number one cause of divorce, on its own, hating your in laws is very much so a leading cause of divorce. Whether it be a husband's mother and father or a wife's mother and father, here are some steps and key points to address. These are to help navigate you towards a resolution or final decision without having to ignore the issues or be passive aggressive and to ultimately learn how to be able to set boundaries.

First, sit with the self.

Before you can take on your Monster In Law, you need to give yourself a time-out (probably more than one) to evaluate the situation and develop a game plan that’s right for you. Find a quiet space free of distractions where you can note everything that has taken place to date. It's okay to ask yourself the harder questions. Example: Should i divorce my wife? Should I divorce my husband? Do I have a narcissistic mother in law? Does my husband chooses his family over me? Readdress whatever has crossed your mind up until this point.

Allow yourself to process the list, mulling and fuming over it — getting all your feelings out — until you can revisit it with a calmer frame of mind. This will enable you to constructively take on the situation, coming from a more rational space when moving forward.

Consider where your MIL is coming from.

With or without empathy or sympathy, try to see your MIL’s side, and how her behavior may be a symptom of larger issues she has with herself and her relationship with your spouse — and not you. Even though you may feel that she has multiple personality disorders. In some cases, a mother-in-law's hostility may be an act of frustration over being disconnected from him. If this is the case, this is something that your husband needs to work on with his mother.

While it's challenging, try to be objective as you evaluate the situation. Honestly ask yourself if she has a valid opinion. Consider if her actions and words are coming from a place of love, and if this needs to be acknowledged. Consider, too, if she’s struggling with feelings of having been dethroned in her family, and if there are ways you can make her feel important and needed in her own way.

Ask yourself what role you’re playing in the situation.

There are situations in which a person has done nothing to cause the relationship with in-laws to become strained. Yet there are also situations in which the DIL is doing, or not doing, something that is causing the in-laws to treat her the way they are, warranted or not. Think back to how you’ve engaged your in-laws, and ask yourself honestly if a third party could find fault with that. Are you a total victim in this scenario, or do you do or say things to instigate a negative response? If so, consider how you can change the way you’re handling the situation or reacting to it, so as not to invite any antagonism.

Don’t have any expectations.

We can all learn from the Buddhist belief that expectations lead to suffering. Don’t allow yourself to suffer any more: Let go of expectations around how things "should" be when it comes to family relationships. Don’t want what you can’t have. Instead, be realistic about the situation, including any non negotiable circumstances. If you’re not going to be close, given what has transpired, maybe that’s for the better. Instead of trying to live out some Hallmark illusion, contemplate how you can work with the way things are. For example, is a coolish relationship possible?

Be okay with not having their approval.

You don’t need anyone’s approval to live your life the way you want. Don’t drive yourself crazy trying to get your in-laws' thumbs-up. Not caring what they think about you could be freeing and empowering.

Trust your instincts.

If your intuition sounds the alarm, listen to it. It’s there to take care of you, as Camilla, a 35-year-old consultant, learned: “The first time I met my mother-in-law, I found her warm and beautiful. But when she hugged me good-bye at the end of that evening, something went off in me indicating that this wasn’t a good person. Sadly, my instincts weren’t wrong.”

How to Engage

Unless your spouse wants nothing to do with his parents, you can’t ignore your in-laws. So when you find yourself in their company, do the following:

Don’t try to fake a relationship that isn’t there.

Yes, they’re legally your parents-in-law, but are they really treating you like family? You don’t need to refer to your in-laws as “Dad” or “Mother,” if there is no intimacy or warmth that warrants the use of the terms. Using these words also adds to a power dynamic with them that may not work for you. In calling your parents-in-law by their first names, you create a more level playing field.

Be assertive.

This needs to remain central, no matter what you’re communicating. While initial attempts to engage your in-laws should be courteous, the problem with being too polite for fear of coming across as rude or pushy is that you don’t establish necessary boundaries. Thus, you aren’t able to communicate how deep the problems are, and how troubled you are.

Remember, you’re not necessarily dealing with a person or people who are nice. You don’t need to always play nice in getting your points across.

Avoid stooping to her level.

It is tempting to fight fire with fire, taking digs at your MIL, calling her names, or being equally rude. Don’t go there. In your discussions, no matter how heated, stick with the facts. Interact using mindfulness, and take the higher road without compromising how you will allow yourself to be treated.

Manage your emotions

Central to managing your in-laws is managing your emotions:

Don’t take criticisms personally.

As Hilary Rodham Clinton put it: “Take criticism seriously, but not personally. If there is truth or merit in the criticism, try to learn from it. Otherwise, let it roll right off you.” In many cases, you’ll realize that your MIL is just being her usual self, and that she, at the end of the day, has to deal with herself and the consequences of her actions.

When she throws dirt your way, have a visualization exercise that allows the statement to literally roll off your back. Envision what she just said captured in a water balloon, which then rolls off your shoulders and down your back before smashing on the ground below your feet.

Have a way to deal with your anger.

This might be going for a walk following a difficult interaction, or hitting the pool to blow off some steam, or taking to the golf course for some relaxation. You cannot allow the anger to consume you, or else it will destroy you and your marriage. Find your outlets for working through the negative energy on a regular basis.

Find trusted persons to vent to.

Your spouse may not always be in the mood to hear about how awful his mother and parents are. It’s important to turn to good friends and/or support groups in getting some things off of your chest. Your marriage will become even more strained otherwise.

When All Else Fails

Practice a "healthy selfishness.”

You need to take care of yourself before you can take care of a situation. This involves excusing yourself from family gatherings for some quality “me time,” not answering the phone when you know it’s your MIL, and keeping your distance as a couple around times like the holiday to take care of yourselves and your family, in spite of expectations. It is only when people practice this kind of “me” and “us” prioritizing that they reach their full potential.

Opt out.

Some in-law situations never get to a better place. As Christina Steinorth stated on yourtango.com: “Just because you’re married, you’re under no obligation to be emotionally abused by toxic people.” If your MIL was a boyfriend, your friends would tell you to dump him. If your MIL bullied someone, people would advise that person to keep his distance and set limits. Just because she’s your MIL doesn’t mean that you have to tolerate abuse.

Limit your in-laws’ involvement.

Whenever anyone becomes toxic to your marriage or family, you have the right to roll up the “Welcome” mat and say, “Game over.” You, your spouse, and your primary family have the right to a peaceful existence, with the people in your circle being those who are a positive and supportive presence. If you are being disrespected and mistreated by your in-laws, then they aren’t entitled to the privileges that come with being in that circle. You have every right to draw and maintain strong boundaries in protecting yourself and your marriage. Nobody has the right to make your life miserable, and only you can make sure of that.

Need help? Talk to our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC today. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

What to do Following your Separation | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Fri, 17 Apr 2020 03:19:17 GMT

When given the news of divorce, many people panic and struggle with the separation that comes before the divorce. Here are some tips to help you through the separation process:

Self Care

Separating is one of the most difficult times of the divorce process. This is when the normalcy of everyday life is flipped upside down and you feel first hand the reality of what divorced life is going to be like. Truthfully, it can be any or all of the following: chaotic, stressful, sad, and lonely. The important thing to remember during this process is to take time for yourself. While it may sound nice to just lock yourself in your room and hideout under the covers all day, you need to get out and do things for you. Getting out and re-establishing your independence can offer you the repair and healing you need to move on and find happiness.

Define Guidelines For Your Family

If you have children, it is important that guidelines are established early on that offer both flexibility and structure for both parents to follow during this stressful time.

Talk to Your Children

When you are separating from your spouse, your children may assume that they somehow had some part in it. The key is to engage your children in dialogs where you make it very clear that it was not their fault. This does not mean that you need to get into the intricacies of what went wrong or the fight you two got in last week.

Use Mantras to Remind You of Your Goals

You want to get back to your best self, which means that you need to remember the things that make you YOU and what you are passionate about in your life.

Here is an example of a mantra for you:

"I am a loving person that wants the best for my friends and family"

Here is an example of a mantra for your child(ren):

"Both of my parents love me and I am proud of myself."

Have more questions? Our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC can help you navigate a separation . Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Transferring a Family Business to the Next Generation | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Fri, 17 Apr 2020 02:57:58 GMT

Many people who seek estate planning advice are owners of family businesses, and one of their chief concerns is how to pass on the business to the next generation.

The fact is, there are almost as many ways to transfer a family business as there are family businesses. There’s no way to know what’s best for you without a thorough discussion of your goals, your family, and your complete financial picture. However, there’s no question that dealing with a family business is an essential aspect of planning your estate.

Here’s a broad, general look at some of the ways in which a business can be transferred to your children:

Put it in your will.

You can give your interest in the business to your children in your will. This is simple, and it allows you to keep complete control of the business for as long as you live.

There are some downsides to this method, however. Some business owners think that their children will benefit from having an ownership stake in the business while they learn to manage it. Some owners worry that as they get older, they might no longer be competent to fully run the company’s affairs. In addition, there may be very significant tax advantages to transferring all or part of the business while you’re still alive.

Give it away now.

You could make a gift to your children of all or part of the business. This might result in your having to pay a gift tax, but at least through the end of the year, the lifetime gift exclusion is very large, so there might be little or no current gift tax to pay.

A big advantage to giving away your interest now is that any future appreciation in the value of the business will be excluded from your estate, so it won’t be subject to estate tax when you die.

One disadvantage is that, generally, your children’s tax basis in the business will be the same as yours (whereas if they inherited their ownership interest through your will, they would get a “stepped-up” basis equal to the value as of the date of death). But there are ways to mitigate this problem.

Sell to your children.

Some people want to transfer the ownership of a business while they’re still alive, but they also want to continue receiving income from the business. The answer is usually to sell the business to the children. Of course, the children might not have enough assets of their own to buy the business for its fair market value. But that’s okay; there are many alternatives.

For instance, you could sell an interest in the business in return for a promissory note. The children would pay off the interest and principal over time using income from the business, and you would have a great deal of flexibility to structure the note in a way that meets your needs.

A variation on the promissory note is a “self-cancelling installment note,” which is a type of promissory note that says that if you pass away before the note is paid off in full, any further obligations to you or to your estate are cancelled. This has different tax consequences from a standard promissory note, and it might be worth considering. Self-cancelling notes generally must have an interest rate premium in order to avoid gift tax issues, but with interest rates so low today, this might not be a problem.

Other variations include a sale of the business in return for a private annuity, which is like a self-cancelling note but with different annual payments. Also, you can give the business to your children via a “grantor retained annuity trust,” in which the trustee makes annuity payments to you for a term of years out of the profits of the business, after which the trust ends and the children become the new owners.

Transfer the business to a trust.

You can also sell or give an interest in the business to a trust for your children’s benefit. A big advantage of a trust is that it protects the children’s interest from creditors and ex-spouses – so the business will be less at risk if the child gets sued or goes through a messy divorce.

It’s usually possible to set things up so that the child is a co-trustee who can make business decisions regarding the company, but a second trustee will control distributions of income to the child (to protect against claims from creditors).

Many business owners give or sell business interests to a “grantor trust,” in which the owner continues to pay the income tax on the trust assets. Among the advantages of such a trust are that it can avoid capital gains tax on the sale of the trust assets, and it can avoid income tax on interest payments from the trust to the owner. This can be a very powerful method of transferring wealth.

All of the above ideas can be combined in various ways. For instance, you could arrange a transfer of a business interest is partly a gift and partly a sale. And if you’re not comfortable giving up control, it’s usually possible to split the ownership of the business into voting and non-voting interests, and for now you could transfer only non-voting interests.

Considerations for the children.

Often a business owner will have several children, and not all of them will be equally interested in the business. For instance, suppose an owner has three children – Peter, Paul, and Mary – and while Peter and Mary are enthusiastic about the business, Paul has chosen a very different career path.

One option is to give or sell the business to Peter and Mary, but provide for Paul in some other way. For instance, you could leave other assets to Paul in your will, or purchase a life insurance policy that names Paul as the beneficiary.

Once Peter and Mary become part-owners of the company, some thought should be given to what would happen if one of them died or became incapacitated. If Mary dies, and her heirs inherit her share of the business, will that be the best thing for the company? Maybe not. Her heirs might want to sell their share, or might have to do so to pay estate taxes.

A good option is for Mary and Peter to enter into a buy-sell agreement, which says that if one of them dies, the other one (or the business itself) will have the option to buy out that person’s interest at some fair price. This purchase can be funded by having life insurance policies on Peter and Mary’s lives, with either the other sibling or the business itself as the beneficiary.

As you can see, transferring a family business has many complexities. But the good news is that there are many, many options – and with careful planning, you can choose the ones that make the most sense for your business, your family, and your long-term goals.

Have questions? Talk to our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Thinking Divorce? Redo your Estate Plan | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Fri, 17 Apr 2020 01:58:05 GMT

Divorce is stressful, and if you’re considering a marital split, the last thing you’re probably focusing on is your estate planning documents. But if you’re thinking of getting divorced, it’s usually wise to revise your estate plans now rather than later.

For example:

You might have signed a power of attorney document that allows your current spouse to make gifts, sign contracts, and make financial decisions for you.
You might have a life insurance policy that names your spouse as the beneficiary.
You might have a lot of your money in joint accounts to which your spouse has unlimited access.
You might have a health care proxy that allows your spouse to make medical decisions for you if you become incapacitated.

In each of these cases, this might be a good time to give some additional thought to your arrangements.

In addition, it’s a good idea to revise your will. You may have heard that in many states, if you get divorced, any bequest to your spouse will automatically be cancelled. That’s true in some places – but, even where it’s true, there are several problems with relying on this fact alone.

Something significant could happen before your divorce is finalized

First, divorce is a lengthy process, and there’s a small chance that something could happen to you before your divorce is final. (No one wants to think about this, of course, but estate planning is all about planning for the unthinkable.)

In a case in New Mexico, a man who had filed for divorce died unexpectedly before his divorce decree had been finalized. He hadn’t gotten around to updating his will, which benefited his wife. The man’s son was appointed his executor. The son asked that a court issue a final divorce decree, which would revoke the man’s bequests to his wife. But, the court said that the bequests couldn’t be revoked in this situation – and therefore the wife was entitled to collect the man’s assets under his will.

Even if a divorce cancels out any bequests to your spouse in your will, it doesn’t determine what will happen instead

A second problem is that even if a divorce cancels out any bequests to your spouse in your will, it doesn’t determine what will happen instead . You still need to revise your will to decide what will happen to your property. And you might want to review this carefully with your attorney because the rules for taxes, trusts, and so on can be very different for single people than for married people.

You may have other beneficiaries

Finally, you’ll want to review the beneficiaries of other accounts you may have – including IRAs, 401(k)s, pension plans, transfer-on-death accounts, etc. Remember: even if a state law says that a divorce cancels out your bequests in a will, it doesn’t necessarily cancel out your beneficiary designations on these types of accounts.

Have more questions? Our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC can help you with estate planning . Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Surviving With Spouses in Quarantine | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

brian@thelawcorner.com (Brian Demidovich) — Mon, 30 Mar 2020 19:47:19 GMT

In these uncertain and challenging times, you are often bouncing between your best and worst version of yourself—as is your spouse. Depending on which side of the fence you are on, you may clash with the one who is closest to you. Here is a list of steps to remember and to live, love, and swear (in every way) by.

Make getting along your goal and make sure your actions are aligned with that goal.

Stop , Breathe , and Analyze the Situation . You are no good to anyone else, especially yourself, if you lose your cool, so enter every moment with the mindset to Get Along . That doesn’t mean fake your feelings or betray your true emotions. It means find a way to convey your opinions in a positive light. Don’t pretend to smile, just be honest and non-threatening. Invite your spouse to participate in a constant mutual understanding. Use this time as a reintroduction into each other. If there was ever a time to be each other’s best friend, that time is now.

Accept your spouse for who they were, are, and will be.

You fell in love with your significant other for a reason, try not to let go of that. Yes, people change. Yes, people navigate life differently. But remember who that “stranger” sitting across from you in your living room truly is. There is no written rule that we have to get along with our loved ones every single second of the day, but there is one that says we should always play nice... at least there should be. Even though you may spend the most time with this person, as long as you live you will never know 100% what it is like to be them. The biggest window into that world is typically how they choose to express themselves–sometimes captivating and entertaining, other times confusing and off-putting. Your spouse can appear in “different forms” at times, but they are still themselves. Accepting that total package will not only help ease any tension, it will strengthen your relationship.

Recognize your spouse has good intentions and give them the benefit of the doubt.

They Come in Peace . We sometimes take for granted and misread the intentions of others. Our demand of certain behaviors from others can be unhealthy, and we typically can set the bar so high that our expectations are scarcely reached. Your spouse is trying, and no matter how much you may be your own fan, you aren’t always a glass of sunshine to be around. Sorry Cupcake. Before jumping to conclusions, or using this isolated time to piece together a puzzle of your interpretations of whichever situation may be at hand, put the monocle down and play back the previous interactions between your spouse and you. This time, see it from their point of view. We doubt they moved your office papers as a final ploy to sabotage you during their well planned for and highly anticipated quarantined life with you. Relax and Reset. They are trying their best here.

Don't assume or interpret, ask your spouse how they are feeling.

It takes 4 words, How Are You Doing? And then, say nothing. But don’t just say nothing, LISTEN. Pay attention and listen to your spouse. Put the phone away, turn the T.V. down, and fill your head with the words of your partner. Refrain from moments to interject, especially if it’s about you, because, wait for it, this is THEIR take on it. Give them the podium to express themselves, and sometimes that takes several cracks at it. Although it may seem scattered at moments, they are finding their voice, and they themselves are figuring out how they feel as well. Being totally honest with each other starts with being totally honest with yourself first. Sometimes you have to be reintroduced to yourself to offer up your feelings towards others. Putting feelings out in the open and addressing them out loud is a big step towards resolution. Just be there. All of you. As much as you can. For Them. And be respectful damnit, maybe take this out haha sharing is caring.

Give each other space.

"Absence makes the heart grow fonder” , is the politest way to say “I love you but if I don’t have 30 minutes to myself right now, the virus will be the least of your concern.” You need space, they need space, frankly the whole world needs space more than ever right now. Social distancing doesn’t just keep your body healthy, it heals your spirit as well. It’s okay to require space to hit reset, and be respectful of others if that’s where they currently are mentally. 5 weeks of arguing sometimes could have been resolved with just an initial 5 minutes to take a breather alone. If you want to bring someone closer, sometimes you need to do it from far away.

Respect, appreciate, and admire your spouse.

Unfortunately, trophy shops are closed and parades are banned for the foreseeable future, so find a way to express the magnitude of your spouse’s "awesomeness" that hits home… in your home. Be in their corner more than ever during this difficult time, and don’t miss an opportunity to be their #1 fan. You don’t have to go overboard, sometimes it’s the smallest moments that can ignite a sense of accomplishment in your spouse. I’ve also found that thank you’s and compliments can go a very, very, long way. And no one has ever said “No” to a surprise snack. Something I used to always think about was how sometimes people just want to hear "THANK YOU" and "I’M SORRY". Those two phrases mean so much, when someone usually has too much pride to say anything at all. Last by not least, tell the ones you love that you love them, and tell the truth whenever you can. Just like how the current situations in the world are rare, so are these new opportunities to interact with your spouse. Embrace it empathetically.

It’s moments like these that can rebuild a foundation even stronger than before.

Need help? Talk to our team of attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Co-Parenting and Summer Fun | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 30 Mar 2020 01:42:07 GMT

"You can Always Find the Time to Make it Work."

After going through the painful process of a separation or divorce, the summer is a great time to redirect your attention to spending some healthy time with your kids and rethinking how you communicate with your ex-spouse. It’s beneficial to your children to see your interactions as parents as positive one. Embrace the new dynamic, your still parents and love your children. Planning a special time together and having a positive interaction in front of your children will go a long way in their healthy development. Summertime is a great opportunity to make some time and plan for fun activities and/or adventures! Here are some helpful tips:

Aim for effective communication.

Be sure to have open mind and clear communication with your ex-spouse. Be respectful, it is even ok to laugh in each other’s company. If you both try to stay positive, you are both giving your kids the best environment to grow and be happy. Remember to keep your conversations about the kids and leave your personal emotions at home.

Plan something fun!

Ask the kids what they are interested in and find activities that involve those interests, maybe include the other parent in those activities.

Be flexible.

The summer is a great time to be flexible with your visitation schedules. There is more time available with your kids and there are more activities planned over the summer. Certain activities may not fall on a date that is your week with the kids or vice versa, so be understanding and willing to share or trade time.

Need help? Contact our team at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

What to Expect with a Divorce | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 30 Mar 2020 01:27:05 GMT

Although divorce is common throughout the United States, the divorce process varies depending on the couple’s situation. Short-term marriages without children or property typically result in a less complex and time-consuming divorce than long-term marriages with significant property entanglements, marital debt, and minor children. Additionally, divorcing couples who work together to negotiate the terms of the divorce ( child custody , child support , property division , debt allocation , and spousal support ) will experience a less expensive and less stressful divorce than couples who can’t agree or refuse to work together.

Step One: Filing the Divorce Petition

Whether both spouses agree to the divorce or not, before any couple can begin the divorce process, one spouse must file a legal petition asking the court to terminate the marriage. The filing spouse must include the following information:

a statement which informs the court that at least one spouse meets the state’s residency requirements for divorce
a legal reason—or grounds—for the divorce, and
any other statutory information that your state requires.
Residency requirements vary depending on where you live. States usually require at least one spouse to live in the state anywhere from 3 months to 12 months, and in the county where the spouse files at least 10 days to 6 months before filing the petition. Divorcing spouses must meet the state’s residency requirement before the court can accept the case.

Grounds for divorce vary from state-to-state. However, all states offer divorcing couples the option to file a no-fault divorce. No-fault divorce is a streamlined process that allows spouses to file a divorce petition without listing a specific reason or placing blame on either spouse. If your spouse committed marital misconduct or caused the breakup, some states allow parties to claim “fault” for the divorce, like adultery or neglect. If you’re unsure whether you should file a no-fault or fault divorce, contact an experienced family law attorney in your state for guidance.

Step Two: Asking for Temporary Orders

Courts understand that the waiting period for divorce may not be possible for all couples. For example, if you are a stay-at-home parent that is raising your children and dependent on your spouse for financial support, waiting for 6-months for the judge to finalize your divorce probably seems impossible. When you file for divorce, the court allows you to ask the court for temporary court orders for child custody, child support, and spousal support.

If you request a temporary order, the court will hold a hearing and request information from each spouse before deciding how to rule on the application. The judge will usually grant the temporary order quickly, and it will remain valid until the court orders otherwise or until the judge finalizes the divorce.

Other temporary orders may include a request for status quo payments or temporary property restraining orders. Status quo orders typically require the breadwinner to continue paying marital debts throughout the divorce process. Temporary property restraining orders protect the marital estate from either spouse selling, giving away, or otherwise disposing of marital property during the divorce process. Restraining orders are usually mutual, meaning both spouses must follow it or risk being penalized by the court.

If you need a temporary order but didn’t file your request at the time you filed for divorce, you’ll need to apply for temporary orders as quickly as possible.

When you file for divorce, the court allows you to ask the court for temporary court orders for child custody, child support, and spousal support.

Step Three: Serve Your Spouse and Wait for a Response

Service: The filing spouse’s responsibility

After you file the petition for divorce and request for temporary orders, you need to provide a copy of the paperwork to your spouse and file proof of service with the court. Proof of service is a document that tells the court that you met the statutory requirements for giving a copy of the petition to your spouse. If you don’t properly serve your spouse, or if you neglect to file a proof of service with the court, the judge will be unable to proceed with your divorce case.

Service of process can be easy, especially if your spouse agrees with the divorce and is willing to sign an acknowledgment of service. However, some spouses, especially ones that want to stay married or make the process complicated, can be evasive or try anything to frustrate the process. The easiest way to ensure proper service is for the filing spouse to hire a professional who is licensed and experienced in delivering legal documents to difficult parties. The cost is usually minimal and can help prevent a delay in your case. If your spouse retained an attorney, you could arrange to have the paperwork delivered to the attorney’s office.

Response: The receiving spouse’s responsibility

The party who receives the paperwork (usually titled “defendant” or “respondent”) must file an answer or reply to the divorce petition within a prescribed amount of time. Failure to respond could result in a “default” judgment against the non-responding spouse, which can be complicated and expensive to reverse.

The responding party has the option to dispute the grounds for divorce (if a fault divorce), the allegations in the petition, or assert any disagreements as to property, support, custody, or any other divorce-related issues.

Step Four: Negotiate a Settlement

In cases where the parties have differing opinions on important topics, like child custody, support, or property division, both spouses will need to work together to reach an agreement. Sometimes the court will schedule a settlement conference, which is where the parties and their attorneys will meet to discuss the status of the case. The court may schedule mediation, which is where a neutral third-party will help facilitate discussion between the spouses in hopes to resolve lingering issues. Some states require participation in mediation, while others do not. However, mediation often saves significant time and money during the divorce process, so it's often a good route for many divorcing couples.

Step Five: Divorce Trial

Sometimes negotiations fail despite each spouse’s best efforts. If there are still issues that remain unresolved after mediation and other talks, the parties will need to ask the court for help, which means going to trial. A divorce trial is costly and time-consuming, plus it takes all the power away from the spouses and puts it in the hands of the judge. Negotiations and mediation sessions allow the couple to maintain control and have more predictable results than a divorce trial, so it’s best to avoid a trial if possible.

Step Six: Finalizing the Judgment

Whether you and your spouse negotiated throughout the divorce process, or a judge decided the significant issues for you, the final step of divorce comes when the judge signs the judgment of divorce. The judgment of divorce (or “order of dissolution”) ends the marriage and spells out the specifics about how the couple will allocate custodial responsibility and parenting time, child and spousal support, and how the couple will divide assets and debts. If the parties negotiated a settlement, the filing spouse’s attorney typically drafts the judgment. However, if the couple went through a divorce trial, the judge will issue the final order.

If you are going through a divorce, talk to our team at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC today, We'd love to help. Call us at 919-424-8319 .

Signs Of Conflict | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:28:16 GMT

Allowing conflict to grow into loud, dangerous, or aggressive levels with words or behavior.

1. Withdrawal and Avoidance

Closing yourself off, shutting the door literally
Avoiding opportunities for closeness
Making excuses not to communicate

2. Escalation

Allowing conflict to grow into loud, dangerous, or aggressive levels with words or behavior

3. Negative Interpretations

Taking words and behaviors out of context
Finding the dark side of neutral statements

4. Invalidation

Finding ways to discount, ridicule, or deny the feelings or behaviors of the other
Sarcasm, involving 3rd parties (gossip), treating your partner like a bad child

Suggestions to Improve Dealing with Conflict:

Seek a member of your church or congregation to assist with your communication
Seek a professional either a Licensed Marital Counselor, or a Family Therapist
Choose a time to discuss the conflict together without distraction
Speak for yourself, do not mind read
Do not threaten or blame
Keep statements brief
Take turns talking, do not monopolize
Limit time spent dealing with conflict: more is not always better
Do not deal with conflict after consuming alcohol or when you are sick or exhausted.

Have questions? Talk to our team at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

Property Settlement Agreements | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 08 Apr 2019 13:16:32 GMT

Under North Carolina Law, a Separation Agreement is defined as a contract in writing between husband and wife that is signed and notarized. It may resolve all issues relating to child custody , child support , division of property and debt , and alimony . In North Carolina, you must be living separate and apart for one year in order to be granted a legal divorce. During that one year waiting period, you want to protect yourself from the actions and inaction of your estranged spouse. The best advice I can give you is to ignore everything you hear from your friends, neighbors, and co-workers and seek the advice of an attorney.

Meditation is often a great alternative to court when deciding these property settlements. In court, you lose control over the results because the judge takes control. Meditation can be powerful for creating outcomes that are most favorable to both parties. Luckily, Brian Demidovich , a DRC Certified Mediator , is highly skilled in the art of mediation.

Our attorneys at The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC can help with a variety of family legal issues. Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.

10 Things to Consider when Separating | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 08 Apr 2019 13:14:59 GMT

Get Some Counseling, Marriage or Otherwise

Counseling is always a good starting point to establish if you are certain that you want or need to separate. There are times when couples are unhappy together but don’t really want to take that final step and separate. You need to be sure that the relationship has suffered an irretrievable breakdown before you can begin to consider the emotional and financial changes, the change in living arrangements, property and what happens to any children under 18 years old.

Once the separation process begins it can be very hard to go back to a happy and stable relationship. Counseling can be helpful, even if attended on your own, to help you deal with the separation even after the decision has been made to separate.

Where are the Kids Going to Live?

When parents separate, the children’s best interests are paramount. The parents need to come up with a custody schedule that maintains a relationship with both parents. Often this is easier said than done while in the midst of separating. Parents should attempt to put their emotions relating to the separation aside for the benefit of the children. Try and involve someone you both trust to facilitate communication regarding the children.

Decide about Your Living Arrangements

Unless you are being abused, never leave the marital home without consulting an experienced family law attorney. When deciding who stays in the home and who goes, it is important to think about your long-term goals. If you want to continue living in the home so that there is less disruption for the children, but are concerned that you cannot pay the monthly expenses on your own, then you may be able to require your partner to contribute to your shortfall. If you decide to leave the home, then this may be fine too as the law will recognize your legal rights to the home and the household furnishings.

Furniture and Personal Effects

If you decide to leave the family home, it is advisable to take everything you need by way of furniture, appliances, clothes, jewelry etc. Generally, the Courts will consider all belongings to be jointly owned and therefore movable by either person. If you don’t take items with you that you really want, then you risk your partner taking them or refusing that you have them. Equally, if you’re the person who’s staying, you are allowed to change the locks after the spouse vacates and shows no intent to return, to prevent the departing spouse from gaining re-entry – even if the house is in joint names.

Get All Legal and Financial Documents Sorted

It is very important that you know where you stand in terms of the financial assets and liabilities of your relationship. You need to know what your partner’s financial position is as well as yours so that you can make informed decisions moving forward. Important legal and financial documents include your tax returns, bank statements, investment accounts, insurance documents, passport, driving license, birth / marriage certificate etc.

Open Your Own Bank Account

Where there are joint bank accounts, both you and your partner could remove all the funds or a portion of the funds from the account. If you have decided to leave the home, then you will need the money to assist you with moving. Equally, if you are going to remain in the home, then you will need the money to help with costs of running the home. Often times one half of the money or more is moved by one of the spouses before either meet with an attorney.

Check Your Life Insurance and Death Benefits

If you have nominated your partner as a beneficiary of any of these, you may want to change this immediately. Where possible we suggest that you take all necessary steps to ensure any such benefits pass to your estate or your children in the event of your death.

Update/Make a Will and Lasting Power of Attorney

It is important to understand that separation does not change gifts in a will. So if your will says “I appoint my partner as my executor and give all my estate to my partner” and you die, then your partner (or ex-partner) will have the ability to make decisions about your estate and receive everything.

Notify Benefits and Child Support Agency

If you are receiving any state benefit payments, you need to notify any and government departments of your change in relationship status as you will obviously be dealt with differently as a single person. The same applies with the Child Support Agency, if you have children, as the Agency’s role is to collect payments from the non-residential partner to pay the residential partner on a means and needs basis.

Get Professional Legal Advice

Our attorneys at The Law Corner can help you navigate a separation .

Contact us today to take your first step in the right direction. Call (919) 424-8319 for your (up to) ONE HOUR consultation!

Your Future Matters.

Why be Represented by The Law Corner? | The Law Corner | Raleigh, NC

Mon, 08 Apr 2019 13:14:59 GMT

Our main priorities are helping our clients understand the law, the different ways to reach a resolution, and their options along the way including the risks, the rewards, and the cost. We provide straightforward and honest advice. The Law Corner in Raleigh, NC actually cares about our clients. Being represented by a lawyer in negotiation , litigation may be in your best interest but you may also want to consider mediation (with or without attorneys) and collaboration .

The Law Corner has over 40 years of combined law experience in family law cases alone, and we are here for you to get your life back on track whichever process you choose.

Our lawyers only focus in family law matters . As a service to our clients we also provide estate planning . We are willing to represent clients in Wake , Durham , Orange , and Johnston Counties .

Call us at 919-424-8319 for a (up to) one hour consultation.