Missing $50,000 from community property

[Bali Hai]

A forensic accountant is who you call if you want someone to investigate whether she has accounts somewhere that she is not disclosing. I do not necessarily think they would be able to determine exactly where this mystery $30k went. If she took the money out 4 years ago, well I can assure you that you have spent at least $30k in that time on household expenses, personal expenses, necessities, and luxuries in that amount of time as well. But if your primary worry is that she has some huge savings account hidden somewhere that she is hiding from the court, a forensic accountant is your best chance to find it.

And LD's point is very worth noting - even IF you find a hidden account containing the money from this 401k, if she pulled it out from an account she accrued prior to the marriage, and kept it separate all this time, it isn't marital property anyway.

This is exactly what Mr. Chadwicks ex-wife and lawyer did. They found NOTHING! They even hired an ex-judge who found NOTHING! They tried everything they could to find the alleged hidden money short of an FBI investigation. They found NOTHING!

Mr. Chadwick went to prison for 14 years anyway.

If the judge in OP's case "thinks" the stbx has hidden the money, the same thing should happen to her until she produces the money.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Unfortunately I am realizing that. Women get preferential treatment from the judicial system in divorce cases. I am almost going to say that my attorney (who is a divorced female by the way) is expecting me to roll over and give up everything she wants. I was the one who brought up these issues and she seemed convinced to see a line item in an excel spreadsheet in my stbx's computer, saying the account has been dissolved. I wish I had come into an unexpected large sum of money. I would spend every last dime of it to go find a pitbull like lawyer to fight this tooth and nail instead of this ambulance chasers.

Therapy is cheaper and leaves you in better emotional health in the long run.

Why on earth would you want to spend MORE money than you would likely get in return? If it would cost more money to uncover this "mystery" than you could hope to be awarded, then my LEGAL advice would be to save your money and move on. Just because you have a potential legal claim on something, doesn't mean that it makes financial sense to pursue it.

 

[ecmst12]

Bali, there is a big difference between 2.5 million and 50k. And even without anyone being able to find it, there must have been a good reason for the judge to suspect he was hiding something. And that is neither here nor there regarding THIS case. This is a lot less money, which would not even be clearly marital property, which could very believably have been spent in the 4 years since it was withdrawn, and very little evidence besides the disgruntled husband's suspicion that it is still lurking around somewhere, and less evidence that he would be entitled to any of it if it is.

 

[tranquility]

This is exactly what Mr. Chadwicks ex-wife and lawyer did. They found NOTHING! They even hired an ex-judge who found NOTHING! They tried everything they could to find the alleged hidden money short of an FBI investigation. They found NOTHING!

Mr. Chadwick went to prison for 14 years anyway.

If the judge in OP's case "thinks" the stbx has hidden the money, the same thing should happen to her until she produces the money.

The NOTHING they found was:

In November 1992, Mrs. Barbara Chadwick filed for divorce in the Delaware County (Pennsylvania) Court of Common Pleas.   During an equitable distribution conference in February 1993, Mr. Chadwick informed the state court and Mrs. Chadwick that he had unilaterally transferred $2,502,000.00 of the marital estate to satisfy an alleged debt to Maison Blanche, Ltd., a Gibraltar partnership.

It was later discovered that (1) one of the principals of Maison Blanche had returned $869,106.00 from Gibraltar to an American bank account in Mr. Chadwick's name and that these funds had then been used to purchase three insurance annuity contracts;  (2) $995,726.41 had been transferred to a Union Bank account in Switzerland in Mr. Chadwick's name;  and (3) $550,000.00 in stock certificates that the petitioner claimed he had transferred to an unknown barrister in England to forward to Maison Blanche had never been received.   The state court then entered a freeze order on the marital assets on April 29, 1994.

In May 1994, Mr. Chadwick redeemed the annuity contracts and deposited the funds in a Panamanian bank.   After a hearing on July 22, 1994, the court determined that Mr. Chadwick's transfer of the money was an attempt to defraud Mrs. Chadwick and the court.   At that time, the court ordered petitioner to return the $2,502,000.00 to an account under the jurisdiction of the court, to pay $75,000.00 for Mrs. Chadwick's attorney's fees and costs, to surrender his passport, and to remain within the jurisdiction.   Mr. Chadwick refused to comply, and Mrs. Chadwick thereafter filed a petition to have him held in civil contempt.   Mr. Chadwick failed to appear at any of the three contempt hearings, but his attorney was present.   The court found Mr. Chadwick in contempt of the July 22, 1994, order and issued a bench warrant for his arrest.

 

[stealth2]

Geesh, tranq - why do you have to deal with *facts*?

 

[Bali Hai]

Bali, there is a big difference between 2.5 million and 50k. And even without anyone being able to find it, there must have been a good reason for the judge to suspect he was hiding something. And that is neither here nor there regarding THIS case. This is a lot less money, which would not even be clearly marital property, which could very believably have been spent in the 4 years since it was withdrawn, and very little evidence besides the disgruntled husband's suspicion that it is still lurking around somewhere, and less evidence that he would be entitled to any of it if it is.

I agree, it would be much more attractive to a lawyer to get their grubby hands on part of 2.5M than 50k.

The amount or who does it shouldn't matter, hiding marital assets is hiding marital assets.

 

[Bali Hai]

The NOTHING they found was:

I'll bet Mr. Chadwick's lawyer didn't write that article.....

 

[Bali Hai]

Geesh, tranq - why do you have to deal with *facts*?

The fact is, the "facts" presented are nothing more than opinion and inconclusive conjecture.

 

[tranquility]

I'll bet Mr. Chadwick's lawyer didn't write that article.....

No, now Supreme Court justice Alito did in reporting the third circuit's decision on the matter.

 

[Bali Hai]

No, now Supreme Court justice Alito did in reporting the third circuit's decision on the matter.

They thought he could produce the money. They thought jailing him would force him to turn over the money. If they were so sure, why did they free him? Setting him free shows they weren't so damn sure of themselves afterall, or, he would still be there.

The fact is they were on a witch hunt and Alito (friends with the worst President in US history) joined in. If they have proof that he has the money and control of it, WHERE is the money?

 

[ecmst12]

They believed that he WOULD produce the money. He chose to stay in jail instead of producing the money. I am not at all surprised that there are people in this world who would rather spend 14 years in jail than give money to their ex-spouse, given the choice. You strike me as one of those people.

The judge released him because he believed that further incarceration would not change this guy's mind. NOT because he was convinced that there was never any money to begin with.

And I will say one more time, in THIS POSTER'S case, the money he is concerned about is probably NOT EVEN MARITAL PROPERTY. From his description, it seems like it's an account that was accrued prior to the marriage and cashed out but kept separate during the marriage, making it separate property except maybe a small amount representing the change in value between the day they got married and the day she cashed it out in 2008.

 

[tranquility]

They thought he could produce the money. They thought jailing him would force him to turn over the money. If they were so sure, why did they free him? Setting him free shows they weren't so damn sure of themselves afterall, or, he would still be there.

The fact is they were on a witch hunt and Alito (friends with the worst President in US history) joined in. If they have proof that he has the money and control of it, WHERE is the money?

The case was litigated extensively. That you want to start some conspiracy theory about things; how about asking why your hero tried to flee the jurisdiction when he found out there was a warrant issued to ask these very questions? The reason he was finally released is that the civil contempt continued until it became punitive. At the time of the third circuit decision (after years of habeous claims and many different judges finding the facts to be true) it was found he still had the present ability to comply with the court's order. The money is outside of the jurisdiction of the United States. Weren't you paying attention to the facts?

But, even if part of your fevered imagination is true, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt it ain't:

noth·ing [nuhth-ing]
noun
1.no thing; not anything; naught: to say nothing.
2.no part, share, or trace (usually followed by of ): The house showed nothing of its former magnificence.
3.something that is nonexistent.
4.nonexistence; nothingness: The sound faded to nothing.
5.something or someone of no importance or significance: Money is nothing when you're without health.

See Chadwick v. Janecka, 312 F.3d 597 (3d Cir. 12/04/2002)

 

[tranquility]

They believed that he WOULD produce the money. He chose to stay in jail instead of producing the money. I am not at all surprised that there are people in this world who would rather spend 14 years in jail than give money to their ex-spouse, given the choice. You strike me as one of those people.

The judge released him because he believed that further incarceration would not change this guy's mind. NOT because he was convinced that there was never any money to begin with.

And I will say one more time, in THIS POSTER'S case, the money he is concerned about is probably NOT EVEN MARITAL PROPERTY. From his description, it seems like it's an account that was accrued prior to the marriage and cashed out but kept separate during the marriage, making it separate property except maybe a small amount representing the change in value between the day they got married and the day she cashed it out in 2008.

Community property, not marital property. And, we have no idea how it was accumulated. It would be extremely easy to have the entire amount be community property in a short time. Not only with the available limits of contribution, but also with the market at that time.

 

[Bali Hai]

The case was litigated extensively. That you want to start some conspiracy theory about things; how about asking why your hero tried to flee the jurisdiction when he found out there was a warrant issued to ask these very questions? The reason he was finally released is that the civil contempt continued until it became punitive. At the time of the third circuit decision (after years of habeous claims and many different judges finding the facts to be true) it was found he still had the present ability to comply with the court's order. The money is outside of the jurisdiction of the United States. Weren't you paying attention to the facts?

But, even if part of your fevered imagination is true, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt it ain't:


See Chadwick v. Janecka, 312 F.3d 597 (3d Cir. 12/04/2002)

WHERE outside US jurisdiction is the money located?

We can find where Romney hides his money outside US jurisdiction, surely we can find Chadwick's.

I'll believe the money exists, when I see PROOF that it exists.

 

[tranquility]

WHERE outside US jurisdiction is the money located?

We can find where Romney hides his money outside US jurisdiction, surely we can find Chadwick's.

I'll believe the money exists, when I see PROOF that it exists.

Sorry, you must have missed the fact that he admitted he removed the money.

During an equitable distribution conference in February 1993, Mr. Chadwick informed the state court and Mrs. Chadwick that he had unilaterally transferred $2,502,000.00 of the marital estate to satisfy an alleged debt to Maison Blanche, Ltd., a Gibraltar partnership.