Auto Glass Repair and Replacement

contact us

Stipulation And Property Settlement Agreement Virginia

2002—Bazzle v. Bazzle, 37 Va. App. 737The court made no mistake in refusing to despise the husband for suspending payments for spousal assistance, even though the parties` transaction contract required him to pay assistance until the wife remarried or died. When the court filed the final divorce decree, it simply ordered that the transaction contract be “filed with the documents in the subject matter.” When the husband stopped paying spousal assistance, the wife filed a proactive infringement application and obtained a judgment against the husband for a lump sum of assistance that she calculated on the basis of actuarial life expectancy charts and formula in the original settlement agreement. When the husband fully completed the judgment of money, he again stopped paying the aid, and the wife filed a show case for her non-compliance with the payment provisions of the original settlement contract. The Court of Appeal ruled that the support obligations of the spouses of the original transaction contract were merged when they were reduced to a finite monetary judgment, thereby preventing the woman from subsequently attempting to revive the agreement herself in order to pursue other means. Once the husband satisfied the monetary judgment, the wife lost all the additional reasons for the action for support, and had no basis to keep the husband in contempt. Where a plea has been reduced to a judgment, the plea is introduced in the judgment and cannot form the basis of future remedies between the parties. 2006— Miller v. Miller, Va. Ct. of Appeals, Unpublished, No.

1168-06-3 Trial court did not irrting in der Ablehnung von Wifes Antrag zu erh-hen die Ehetenunterst-tzung. The notion that each party would be responsible for its health insurance premium, as set out in the real estate transaction contract, was not ambiguous. Although Wife`s health insurance costs increased, she was not entitled to an increase in spant assistance under the terms of the agreement she signed while represented by counsel. 2005— Galloway v. Galloway, 47 Va. App. 83 Parties` Property Settlement Agreement was not unacceptable, but valid and applicable. Although the husband`s agreement gave 94% of the matrimonial property, there was no evidence of excessive or repressive husband behavior, and at no time did the wife state that she was under duress or that the husband had exerted undue influence on her to sign the agreement. The voluntary abandonment of financial assistance did not in itself justify the agreement as ruthless if Wife inherited US$30,000 and a debt-free house worth $275,000 and stated that she would have no difficulty in being re-employed. 1) Spouse/Support Allowance – If you have established in advance that your divorce contract will be taken into account in the divorce judgment, the court may later change the duration and amount of support if circumstances justifying the increase or reduction of the amount are presented. However, if the divorce contract survives the award, it is a contract that the court cannot amend.

2011— Roth v. Roth, Va. Ct. of Appeals, Unpublished, No. 1332-10-4The court made no error when the parties` settlement agreement was not part of an appropriate participation in a spousal pension that did not exist at the time the contract came into force.