[WSBARP] Off topic Legal Research Need

[Jim Doran]

I realize this is an uphill battle.

Now you bring up the Statute of Limitations issue.  I had not thought of
that (Thanks a lot. 😀)

Jim


James R. Doran
Attorney at Law
100 E. Pine Street -  Suite 205
Bellingham, WA 98225
(360)393-9506
jim at doranlegal.com
www.doranlegal.com

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Eric Nelsen <Eric at sayrelawoffices.com>
wrote:

> Jim-- I may be wrong, but I think there's a 3-year S/L on challenge to a
> settlement on those grounds, so it might be too late.
>
>
>
> Assuming no S/L problem, that sounds like a very, very uneven split of
> assets at divorce, and might meet the requirements for a "substantively
> unfair" property settlement that could be unwound. It's not a slam dunk
> because it never is with divorce--the standard is for a "fair and
> equitable" division of assets that keeps in mind each parties' future
> earning potential and likely financial needs. So it's possible to have a
> "fair and equitable" division that is this lopsided, if Irene had no means
> of support, no prospect of future earnings, and had been married for as
> long as they were.
>
>
>
> However, the transfer of half the inheritance which is clearly Fred's
> separate property is unusual; the court in theory has the power to award
> separate property of one spouse to the other, but in practice does it very
> rarely.
>
>
>
> Re CalPers, are you serious it was truly 100% of the pension to Irene? Did
> Fred not earn any more retirement accrual after divorce? And a QDRO was
> entered at time of divorce that the CalPers administrator accepted? If so,
> I'm not sure what could be done there either; ownership of the CalPers
> pension is now 100% Irene and unwinding that seems unlikely. If it's
> possible at all, it's part of the same general action to unwind the entire
> divorce settlement. I would be in a hurry to get that action completed so a
> new QDRO could be entered reversing the previous one.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> Eric C. Nelsen
>
> SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC
>
> 1417 31st Ave South
>
> Seattle WA  98144-3909
>
> phone 206-625-0092 <(206)%20625-0092>
>
> fax 206-625-9040 <(206)%20625-9040>
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.
> wsbarppt.com] *On Behalf Of *Jim Doran
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 15, 2017 12:52 PM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] Off topic Legal Research Need
>
>
>
> I have a matter with a legal question(s) in an area that I do not
> regularly practice in.
>
> Here is the issue in a nutshell:  Fred was married to Irene for 20 years
> or more.  they lived a middle class lifestyle.  Fred was a truck driver.
> Irene was a spendthrift that sent them through a chapter 7 several years
> before their split up.  They lived in a modest home and had no extravagant
> assets.
>
> Several months before their divorce, in 2012, Fred received an inheritance
> of $1.6 million from his mother.  Just prior to the divorce Fred agreed to
> give Irene $800,000 from his inheritance.  In the divorce proceedings Fred
> did not have a lawyer and Irene did.  Fred signed documents agreeing to
> give Irene the $800,000.  He also signed a settlement agreement that gave
> Irene his full CalPers pension.  There is a discrepancy in the court filing
> regarding the pension.
>
>
>
> The issue now is that Fred is very ill and likely not going to live very
> long.  His current wife, Dawn, has been very good for Fred and has cared
> for him as a nurse (which she was professionally) for many months.  Dawn
> wants the pension to be reassigned by Irene to her.  CalPers needs either
> an agreement from Irene or a Court order.
>
>
>
> The legal questions seem to be two:
>
> 1) Was the "gift" from Fred to Irene at the time of divorce
> unconscionable, inequitable and amenable to be set aside and a more
> appropriate property settlement and spousal maintenance arrangement be
> imposed that reflects Irene's normal and customary lifestyle, especially
> since this fund was clearly Fred's separate property?
>
>
>
> 2) Does the fact that Fred did not have an attorney during the divorce
> proceedings and when he gifted the substantial funds to Irene enough to
> cause a Court to re-open the matter?
>
>
>
> That is the nut of it.
>
>
>
> Do any of you have a contact for me to talk to on this matter?  I may have
> to hire someone who has already gone through this kind of a scenario.  I
> need some case law to support a motion to modify the decree and settlement
> agreement to be a bit more equitable.  If we can scare Irene in to just
> releasing the CalPers pension that would be enough.
>
>
>
> Jim Doran
>
> James R. Doran
>
> Attorney at Law
>
> 100 E. Pine Street -  Suite 205
>
> Bellingham, WA 98225
> (360)393-9506 <(360)%20393-9506>
>
> jim at doranlegal.com
>
> www.doranlegal.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20171016/0167e651/attachment.html>