• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Tenants By The Entirety - Gift To Marital Estate

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

P

phyllis613

Guest
North Carolina

I married in April 2000 and separated in May, 2003. I filed for separation in June 2003, after I found out he had posted 5 on-line ads looking for physical/sex with women, was seriously addicted to online porn, refused counseling.

During marriage he deeded real estate he owned prior to marriage into our names, as Tenants by the Entirety, on 5 separate occasions during 2000-2002. (not all the property at once).

In court first he said I demanded he put the deeds in my name and told his attorney to do it without his knowledge. We went to the attorney's office together to sign deeds. He wrote me a letter that day that stating now the property was "ours" and to enjoy. He signed and dated that letter. Then he said did not know the deeds made them marital property by NC law, and that he thought it was "estate planning." We had done wills in July 2000 for estate planning.

In interim distribution, the judge awarded all real estate to my ex, and gave me a "writ of possession" for this house I live in, and $1000.00 a month in post separation support. He also ordered us to mediation.

My attorney tells me "not to worry" but then, he HAS a home. He says we can subpoena the attorney who did the deeds (no pun intended).

Does anyone have an idea if "I didn't know" is a valid reason for nullifying gifts to the marital estate?



:confused: :eek:
 
Last edited:


H

HomeGuru

Senior Member
phyllis613 said:
North Carolina

I married in April 2000 and separated in May, 2003. I filed for separation in June 2003, after I found out he had posted 5 on-line ads looking for physical/sex with women, was seriously addicted to online porn, refused counseling.

During marriage he deeded real estate he owned prior to marriage into our names, as Tenants by the Entirety, on 5 separate occasions during 2000-2002. (not all the property at once).

In court first he said I demanded he put the deeds in my name and told his attorney to do it without his knowledge. We went to the attorney's office together to sign deeds. He wrote me a letter that day that stating now the property was "ours" and to enjoy. He signed and dated that letter. Then he said did not know the deeds made them marital property by NC law, and that he thought it was "estate planning." We had done wills in July 2000 for estate planning.

In interim distribution, the judge awarded all real estate to my ex, and gave me a "writ of possession" for this house I live in, and $1000.00 a month in post separation support. He also ordered us to mediation.

My attorney tells me "not to worry" but then, he HAS a home. He says we can subpoena the attorney who did the deeds (no pun intended).

Does anyone have an idea if "I didn't know" is a valid reason for nullifying gifts to the marital estate?



:confused: :eek:
Click to expand...
**A: if you have a good attorney, you should get awarded half of all marital real property that was held in T/E.
 
P

phyllis613

Guest
Thanks HomeGuru

There's that dreaded word "IF" lol. I believe my attorney is "good." NC law does state property held T/E is marital.

I was wondering if this man can "dumb" his way out of that gift he made to the marital estate.

We shall see what my attorney will do....


Thanks again.
 
H

HomeGuru

Senior Member
Anyone can act dumb and dumber.
Good luck and make sure you know exactly the strategy taken by your attorney. Ask now.
 
P

phyllis613

Guest
Hi Guru
Well, it seems two years ago the NC Supreme Court made a ruling that changed things a great deal.

They ruled that a man who had brought most of the marital estate into the marriage took most of it out with him. My attorney says he is going "aggressive".

My attorney says think 20%. 30% max. But we are asking for more than 50% because I am disabled now, but worked the farm while my ex went to college, handled the rental properties and put lots of work into upgrading them, increasing yearly rentals by $18,000 per year.

20%? Well, OK. Equitable does not mean 50/50 it seems. The judge can use any factor to "equitably" distribute - including who brought the most into the marriage. Well I brought my heart, soul and brain into this marriage and kept things going. Since separation, all the rentals have vacated, the farm is no longer being farmed and ex is sitting on his duff doing nada.

NC Family Law doesn't like people switching attorneys once a case has begun. Ex has an extremely aggressive attorney (at least when I was on the stand she was quite ugly towards me) and my attorney is so laid back in court.....

Sigh.
 
H

HomeGuru

Senior Member
In my opinion, that Supreme Court ruling is not applicable due to the fact that the tenancy was changed to T/E.
The interim distrubution contained a major error and the judge made a wrong adjudication to award the real estate to your ex if title was T/E.
Soemthing about your case does not make sense.
 
P

phyllis613

Guest
Hi Guru

Well it doesn't make good sense to me either. That's why I am here.

The ex was awarded all the real estate in an "interim distribution" which supposedly has nothing to do with the final equitable distribution, which has not yet occurred. Is that what is confusing? I didn't think I put it was a permanent distribution. It is for the "interim" until we get all properties appraised, etc., and my attorney tells me it means nothing except the ex has to pay for the costs of keeping up all the rentals and the big farm, and I keep up with the small farm here where I live. I was granted a "writ of possession" of this farm until the final distribution.

Are you familiar with that NC Supreme Court ruling? My attorney seems to think it will make a difference in the distribution. I don't mind telling him I think he's wrong, if I have facts to support it.

In fact, I don't mind insisting on another attorney..... but it will entail more and more fees. I already have spent $6,000.00 on this case. I found ONE attorney who was willing to take the equitable distribution case on a contingency basis - 1/3 of what he could get me. I turned that down, though probably he would work a lot harder to get me my share. The total value of the properties in T/E is over 2.5 million.

What in particular does not make sense? I am sincere and this is a real case and how it is going.
 
H

HomeGuru

Senior Member
phyllis613 said:
Hi Guru

Well it doesn't make good sense to me either. That's why I am here.

The ex was awarded all the real estate in an "interim distribution" which supposedly has nothing to do with the final equitable distribution, which has not yet occurred. Is that what is confusing? I didn't think I put it was a permanent distribution. It is for the "interim" until we get all properties appraised, etc., and my attorney tells me it means nothing except the ex has to pay for the costs of keeping up all the rentals and the big farm, and I keep up with the small farm here where I live.

**A: I believe you have used the wrong terminology to describe and explain the events. The court action appears to have been not a "distribution" but rather a liabilty and responsibility type of ruling that has nothing to do with ownership and title issues.
*********
I was granted a "writ of possession" of this farm until the final distribution.

**A: why were you granted a writ? Did you file a writ? I think you mean that you were granted a right to continue to live on the farm until the final divorce settlement.
********

Are you familiar with that NC Supreme Court ruling? My attorney seems to think it will make a difference in the distribution. I don't mind telling him I think he's wrong, if I have facts to support it.

**A: I have read such a ruling but please post the link so I can verify if the ruling that I read is the same one that you are referring to.
*******

In fact, I don't mind insisting on another attorney..... but it will entail more and more fees. I already have spent $6,000.00 on this case. I found ONE attorney who was willing to take the equitable distribution case on a contingency basis - 1/3 of what he could get me. I turned that down, though probably he would work a lot harder to get me my share. The total value of the properties in T/E is over 2.5 million.

What in particular does not make sense? I am sincere and this is a real case and how it is going.

**A: I believe the confusion lies in the terms that you have used to explain your case ie. interim distribution and writ of possession.
Click to expand...
 
P

phyllis613

Guest
**A: I believe you have used the wrong terminology to describe and explain the events. The court action appears to have been not a "distribution" but rather a liabilty and responsibility type of ruling that has nothing to do with ownership and title issues.

(I used the term "interim distribution" as that is what the court calls the interlocutory judgment for interim equitable distribution in NC. It does not actually transfer ownership or title, as you stated. I understand it is not the final ruling, but am still confused why the judge would "grant" all the real estate to my ex, and give me the following:


I was granted a "writ of possession" of this farm until the final distribution.

**A: why were you granted a writ? Did you file a writ? I think you mean that you were granted a right to continue to live on the farm until the final divorce settlement.

(I didn't file a writ. The judge ordered my ex to execute a Writ of Possession for this farm, to me. My attorney tells me it's like a landlord/tenant agreement.....except I pay all the upkeep, taxes, and insurance, repairs, etc. So now my ex is my landlord it appears. Out of the frying pan into the pressure cooker lol.


*A: I have read such a ruling but please post the link so I can verify if the ruling that I read is the same one that you are referring to.
(I have forgotten the case name. My attorney gave it to me in June. It's been many months since I looked at it. In any event, it had to do with separate property being "gifted" to the other spouse by deeding as T/E, and at distribution, the court may consider the separate property "given" during the marriage as a distributional factor, giving the original owner credit. The "gift" may be worthless to the uhhh giftee, thus T/E means nada. That was the case he told me about when he advised me to expect maybe an 80/20 distribution in ex's favor. It was a new ruling by the NC Court of Appeals last year.

**A: I believe the confusion lies in the terms that you have used to explain your case ie. interim distribution and writ of possession.

(I am sorry about the terminology used, but those are the terms used on the legal documents. One is "interim distribution and post separation support" and the other is "Writ of Possession".

I'm glad the background of this posting area is gray - I've learned the law is not black and white like I thought lol.

Thanks for all your help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top