Post Divorce question on real estate property

[stephiej74]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Maine
I was granted a divorce 3 years ago. In the divorce decree the court awarded my ex our real estate property. He was already living there. In the decree it says
He is solely responsible for payment of any and all debts, encumbrances, costs or expenses, now existing or hereinafter incurred, relating to said real estate, and who shall indemnify and hold the other party harmless therefrom.

So three years later, he has not been able to refinance this loan and take my name off from it and therefore, it hurts my credit and shows that I’m $70,000.00 in debt. He has been unable to refinance due to him not having the income needed to do it.

I received a text from him a couple weeks ago saying he has found an apartment and will be moving out of the property and “it’s all mine”. I have contacted the bank and found out that it is in collections and he is 6 months behind on the mortgage payments.

I am prepared to move in to the home and pay the mortgage up to current, however…I don’t want to do this and have him then say he changed his mind and will stay there, after I’ve paid all the back mortgage. So my questions are, Am I legally able to do this? And would he be able to pull something like that?

 

[Ohiogal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Maine
I was granted a divorce 3 years ago. In the divorce decree the court awarded my ex our real estate property. He was already living there. In the decree it says
He is solely responsible for payment of any and all debts, encumbrances, costs or expenses, now existing or hereinafter incurred, relating to said real estate, and who shall indemnify and hold the other party harmless therefrom.

So three years later, he has not been able to refinance this loan and take my name off from it and therefore, it hurts my credit and shows that I’m $70,000.00 in debt. He has been unable to refinance due to him not having the income needed to do it.

I received a text from him a couple weeks ago saying he has found an apartment and will be moving out of the property and “it’s all mine”. I have contacted the bank and found out that it is in collections and he is 6 months behind on the mortgage payments.

I am prepared to move in to the home and pay the mortgage up to current, however…I don’t want to do this and have him then say he changed his mind and will stay there, after I’ve paid all the back mortgage. So my questions are, Am I legally able to do this? And would he be able to pull something like that?

You need to go back to court and ask that he be held in contempt and that you be able to move into the home.

 

[ecmst12]

Will you be able to refinance the loan out of his name?

 

[latigo]

You need to go back to court and ask that he be held in contempt and that you be able to move into the home.

Would you please clarify your response by explaining what you mean by the court allowing the OP "to move into the home"? Are you referring to mere right of possession or possession with title?

Regarding the matter of the ex being citred for contemp, even if the his failure to indemnify the OP were a proper subject of contempt (which is most questionable) it would require proof that the he knowingly and willingly failed to abide by the decree although he had the financial means of doing so!. And there is no indication here that he had the financial means.

 

[Bali Hai]

Would you please clarify your response by explaining what you mean by the court allowing the OP "to move into the home"? Are you referring to mere right of possession or possession with title?

Regarding the matter of the ex being citred for contemp, even if the his failure to indemnify the OP were a proper subject of contempt (which is most questionable) it would require proof that the he knowingly and willingly failed to abide by the decree although he had the financial means of doing so!. And there is no indication here that he had the financial means.

Would this prevent a judge from finding ex in contempt? Or would the judge decide one way or another depending on what side of the bed they got up on that day?

I had two lawyers agree that I was not in contempt but the judge found me in contempt anyway.

A man spent 14 years of his life in prison after being found in contempt with no proof what-so-ever that he had the financial means that the judge THOUGHT he had.

You are operating with the false notion that the system is just and fair, I know that it isn't.

 

[latigo]

Would this prevent a judge from finding ex in contempt? Or would the judge decide one way or another depending on what side of the bed they got up on that day?

I had two lawyers agree that I was not in contempt but the judge found me in contempt anyway.

A man spent 14 years of his life in prison after being found in contempt with no proof what-so-ever that he had the financial means that the judge THOUGHT he had.

You are operating with the false notion that the system is just and fair, I know that it isn't.

Listen up, bali hoo! It is you not I that is working from “false notions”!

If you are going to attack the legal system as being unfair by using an example an exceptional set of circumstances as presented in the much publicized PA case of Chadwick v. Chadwick at least try to get you facts straight.

In other words don’t be trying to analyze the system by looking through a peephole provided by news copy slanted for sensationalism!
_______________________________

It is true that the shyster lawyer H. Beatty Chadwick spent 14 years in the Delaware County jail for his refusal to cough up $2.5M in marital assets, but the facts clearly reveal that he deliberately sequestered that money in order to prevent sharing it with his spouse.

The money trail was clearly shown beginning when he purported to have paid the $2.5M to a Gibraltar partnership in satisfaction of a “debt”.

Latter it was found that the Gibraltar partnership was nothing but a front that immediately transferred $2M into Swiss and US bank in Chadwick’s name.

The other $500K was in the form of stock and supposedly delivered to a barrister in London. But Chadwick has yet to reveal why the transfer of stock and the barrister’s name.

Subsequently it was discovered that that Chadwick converted the funds in the US bank to purchase 3 insurance annuities, which he latter redeemed and placed in a Panama bank account in his name.

Through the course of the years Chadwick has had ample opportunity to purge himself of contempt including 14 separate state and federal court habeas corpus petitions in which he was represented by from time to time by two dozen expensive attorneys.

Also, in direct violation of the court’s July 22, l994 order order Chadwick failed to surrender his passport and fled the country.
_____________________________

From the Pennsylvania divorce court order of November 2, l994 holding him in contempt:

“(His) failure to comply with the July 22, l994 order is based solely upon his desire to deprive his wife of her portion of the marital assets . . . (and, although) having ample opportunity to present any credible evidence to the contrary, he has failed to do so. “

Now if you see some analogy between the con artist Chadwick and the OP's ex husband who has had to give up his home because he can longer afford to keep it, then let's hear your explanation.

 

[Bali Hai]

Listen up, bali hoo! It is you not I that is working from “false notions”!

If you are going to attack the legal system as being unfair by using an example an exceptional set of circumstances as presented in the much publicized PA case of Chadwick v. Chadwick at least try to get you facts straight.

In other words don’t be trying to analyze the system by looking through a peephole provided by news copy slanted for sensationalism!
_______________________________

It is true that the shyster lawyer H. Beatty Chadwick spent 14 years in the Delaware County jail for his refusal to cough up $2.5M in marital assets, but the facts clearly reveal that he deliberately sequestered that money in order to prevent sharing it with his spouse.

The money trail was clearly shown beginning when he purported to have paid the $2.5M to a Gibraltar partnership in satisfaction of a “debt”.

Latter it was found that the Gibraltar partnership was nothing but a front that immediately transferred $2M into Swiss and US bank in Chadwick’s name.

The other $500K was in the form of stock and supposedly delivered to a barrister in London. But Chadwick has yet to reveal why the transfer of stock and the barrister’s name.

Subsequently it was discovered that that Chadwick converted the funds in the US bank to purchase 3 insurance annuities, which he latter redeemed and placed in a Panama bank account in his name.

Through the course of the years Chadwick has had ample opportunity to purge himself of contempt including 14 separate state and federal court habeas corpus petitions in which he was represented by from time to time by two dozen expensive attorneys.

Also, in direct violation of the court’s July 22, l994 order order Chadwick failed to surrender his passport and fled the country.
_____________________________

From the Pennsylvania divorce court order of November 2, l994 holding him in contempt:

“(His) failure to comply with the July 22, l994 order is based solely upon his desire to deprive his wife of her portion of the marital assets . . . (and, although) having ample opportunity to present any credible evidence to the contrary, he has failed to do so. “

Now if you see some analogy between the con artist Chadwick and the OP's ex husband who has had to give up his home because he can longer afford to keep it, then let's hear your explanation.

You've got it backwards my friend, the burden is not on Chadwick to present any credible evidence that he is innocent.

It's up to a jury of his peers to find him guilty based on the evidence, not one persons gut feeling. And this case prompted a review of a judges power to throw someone in the slammer because of perceived contempt of court!

 

[Zigner]

You've got it backwards my friend, the burden is not on Chadwick to present any credible evidence that he is innocent.

It's up to a jury of his peers to find him guilty based on the evidence, not one persons gut feeling. And this case prompted a review of a judges power to throw someone in the slammer because of perceived contempt of court!

No, YOU have it wrong. The evidence of his guilt WAS presented. It's like a tennis game...one side serves and the other side returns. Chadwick didn't bother returning the serve.

 

[Bali Hai]

No, YOU have it wrong. The evidence of his guilt WAS presented. Presented to who? It wasn't a jury. Get the point?It's like a tennis game...one side serves and the other side returns. Chadwick didn't bother returning the serve.

If Chadwick were to have a fair trial, there would be no jury on the face of the earth that would convict him to serve a 14 year prison sentence. Why? Because there simply wasn't any evidence to convict him.

Chadwick isn't required to do anything. His accusers have the burden of proof.

Yet we let a power hungry judge do it on a gut feeling. That needs to be fixed!

 

[ecmst12]

He chose to stay in jail rather than comply with the court order. His choice, not the judge's. I suspect you would make a similar choice if you could - sit in jail instead of giving your ex money.

 

[Bali Hai]

He chose to stay in jail rather than comply with the court order. His choice, not the judge's. I suspect you would make a similar choice if you could - sit in jail instead of giving your ex money.

Forgive me, I forgot that a man is hysterically presumed guilty in family court of hiding money from the wife on her say so and can be sent to jail on a judges whim.

Chadwick sat in jail because he didn't prove his innocence. The judge (along with expensive forensic accountants and other judges) couldn't prove his guilt, and it was the judges choice to throw him in jail, not his.

 

[latigo]

No, YOU have it wrong. The evidence of his guilt WAS presented. It's like a tennis game...one side serves and the other side returns. Chadwick didn't bother returning the serve.

No, I do not have it backwards!

Nor did any of the scores of judges, both state and federal that consistently denied his state court appeals and 14 separate petitions for writ of habeas corpus.

And in each of those proceedings, if you will bother to read them, the courts consistently and correctly ruled that it was Chadwick’s burden to either comply with the order of July 22, l994 directing him to turn over the $2.75M or purge himself of contempt by presenting credible evidence of his inability to do so.

Example from the 2003 United States District Court (Maine) of H. Beatty Chadwick vs. Barbara Jean Chadwick, a/k/a Applegate. Civil Case No. 03-30-P-C:

Finally, the Pennsylvania Superior Court found that given all of (Chadwick’s) appeals and petitions for writ of habeas corpus he had the opportunity to contest the validity of the July 22, l994 order to comply with that order and/or to present evidence as to his inability to comply with that order at the numerous habeas corpus hearings on the contempt, but had failed to do so. Therefore the court upheld the denial of his petition for habeas corpus.

Also, try reading H. Beatty Chadwick, Appellant v s. John Douglas Caulfield, Appelee, Barbara Chadwick, Intervenor, 3528 EDA 2002 Superior Court of Pennsylvania (2003) PA Super 330; 834 A.2d 562; 2003 and,

Chadwick v. Chadwick, 454 Pa. Supr. 700, 685 A.2d 1039 (Pa. Super. 1996) (per curiam), appeal denied, 548 Pa. 624, 693 A.2d 965 (Pa. 1997) affirming the lower courts finding of contempt;

_____________________

I don’t know where you came up with the notion that either H. Beatty Chadwick or anyone else cited for being in contempt of a court, civil or criminal, or for that matter a Congressional Committee, is entitled to a “jury of his peers”?

Or that a contempt citation is tantamount to criminal prosecution imbuing the respondent with the presumption of innocence and affording other constitutional privileges and guarantees.

But you are flat wrong!

End of discussion. I don’t choose to further debate with someone so ill equipped.

 

[Zigner]

Psstt - Lat, you quoted the wrong post

 

[tranquility]

No, I do not have it backwards!

Nor did any of the scores of judges, both state and federal that consistently denied his state court appeals and 14 separate petitions for writ of habeas corpus.

And in each of those proceedings, if you will bother to read them, the courts consistently and correctly ruled that it was Chadwick’s burden to either comply with the order of July 22, l994 directing him to turn over the $2.75M or purge himself of contempt by presenting credible evidence of his inability to do so.

Example from the 2003 United States District Court (Maine) of H. Beatty Chadwick vs. Barbara Jean Chadwick, a/k/a Applegate. Civil Case No. 03-30-P-C:



Also, try reading H. Beatty Chadwick, Appellant v s. John Douglas Caulfield, Appelee, Barbara Chadwick, Intervenor, 3528 EDA 2002 Superior Court of Pennsylvania (2003) PA Super 330; 834 A.2d 562; 2003 and,

Chadwick v. Chadwick, 454 Pa. Supr. 700, 685 A.2d 1039 (Pa. Super. 1996) (per curiam), appeal denied, 548 Pa. 624, 693 A.2d 965 (Pa. 1997) affirming the lower courts finding of contempt;

_____________________

I don’t know where you came up with the notion that either H. Beatty Chadwick or anyone else cited for being in contempt of a court, civil or criminal, or for that matter a Congressional Committee, is entitled to a “jury of his peers”?

Or that a contempt citation is tantamount to criminal prosecution imbuing the respondent with the presumption of innocence and affording other constitutional privileges and guarantees.

But you are flat wrong!

End of discussion. I don’t choose to further debate with someone so ill equipped.

I agree with Zigner, it is Bali Hai who disagrees with you. He has ranted on this issue before and I tried to do what you are doing, provide facts to refute his argument(s). However, his mind is resolute. Facts change nothing. I even put the facts down as provided by the court specifically pointing out the multiple errors he makes--the answer is that that is only one side's facts. When pointed out some of the facts are agreed to by Chadwick (Bali's "good guy"), he says something about how Chadwick's attorney has an explanation for that.

You are merely one who has fallen into the spider's web of using facts or the law to argue with one pounding on the table.

 

[Bali Hai]

No, I do not have it backwards!

Nor did any of the scores of judges, both state and federal that consistently denied his state court appeals and 14 separate petitions for writ of habeas corpus.

And in each of those proceedings, if you will bother to read them, the courts consistently and correctly ruled that it was Chadwick’s burden to either comply with the order of July 22, l994 directing him to turn over the $2.75M or purge himself of contempt by presenting credible evidence of his inability to do so.

Example from the 2003 United States District Court (Maine) of H. Beatty Chadwick vs. Barbara Jean Chadwick, a/k/a Applegate. Civil Case No. 03-30-P-C:



Also, try reading H. Beatty Chadwick, Appellant v s. John Douglas Caulfield, Appelee, Barbara Chadwick, Intervenor, 3528 EDA 2002 Superior Court of Pennsylvania (2003) PA Super 330; 834 A.2d 562; 2003 and,

Chadwick v. Chadwick, 454 Pa. Supr. 700, 685 A.2d 1039 (Pa. Super. 1996) (per curiam), appeal denied, 548 Pa. 624, 693 A.2d 965 (Pa. 1997) affirming the lower courts finding of contempt;

_____________________

I don’t know where you came up with the notion that either H. Beatty Chadwick or anyone else cited for being in contempt of a court, civil or criminal, or for that matter a Congressional Committee, is entitled to a “jury of his peers”?

Or that a contempt citation is tantamount to criminal prosecution imbuing the respondent with the presumption of innocence and affording other constitutional privileges and guarantees.

But you are flat wrong!

End of discussion. I don’t choose to further debate with someone so ill equipped.

Of course the higher courts will not disturb a lower courts discretion to throw someone in jail. These people are elected for life and take care of each other.

I am aware that contempt of court doesn't require the presumption of innocence, but come on, FOURTEEN YEARS in prison?! That was clearly an abuse of power to punish a man who was perceived as keeping money from a woman, worse that murder in family court!

While being the ultimate abuse of power, it clearly demonstrates abuse of power on a lower scale that happens every day. It just doesn't come to the public's attention.