Is a subpoena valid when...

[kevinblackwell]

What is the name of your state? California
My wife's ex is trying to get our escrow information from the title company that we used to refinance our home. The home was jointly owned by my wife and her ex until it was supposed to be sold under the marriage settlement agreement by 2012. However, since my wife and I married in Dec 05, we decided to refinance in order to get his name off of the property and paying him his interest in the home in the sum determined in the marriage settlement agreement. He now wants to know what our closing costs were and has sent a subpoena to the title company asking for the closing cost information. He used the case number from the divorce decree which was final in June 2004 on the subpoena and signed it. There was no clerk or judge’s signature, just his. Is the escrow company required to give out our private financial disclosure?

 

[Ohiogal]

Is there an open case or was the divorce closed and never reopened? If he is questioning how much your wife offered him then he has a right to subpoena the information. Whether the subpoena is properly done is another story.

 

[LdiJ]

Is there an open case or was the divorce closed and never reopened? If he is questioning how much your wife offered him then he has a right to subpoena the information. Whether the subpoena is properly done is another story.

The following would seem to indicate that he was entitled to a specific sum, and received that specific sum, If so, he also has no standing to reopen the issue.

owever, since my wife and I married in Dec 05, we decided to refinance in order to get his name off of the property and paying him his interest in the home in the sum determined in the marriage settlement agreement.

 

[kevinblackwell]

The case was not reopened to my knowledge and he was given a specific amount from the marriage settlement agreement as figured from an appraisal of the home in Dec 2003minus closing costs and brokerage fees. He feels that he should recieve more money since the home was not sold and there were no broker's fees. What he fails to realize is my wife (the person on title) refinanced the home costing $7000 and then there is the added interest on the loan paid until the no later than date of sale, which is another $70,000 plus dollars out of our pockets!

Thanks for your inputs

 

[Bali Hai]

The case was not reopened to my knowledge and he was given a specific amount from the marriage settlement agreement as figured from an appraisal of the home in Dec 2003minus closing costs and brokerage fees. He feels that he should recieve more money since the home was not sold and there were no broker's fees. What he fails to realize is my wife (the person on title) refinanced the home costing $7000 and then there is the added interest on the loan paid until the no later than date of sale, which is another $70,000 plus dollars out of our pockets!

Thanks for your inputs

I'm sure the judge will make eveyone happy in this case.

 

[nextwife]

Exactly what did the decree state about the sale of home and the settlement amount?

 

[kevinblackwell]

"The residence shall be listed for sale whenever Wife
decides to sell the property or the year 2012, whichever comes
first. The decision on all aspects associated with listing and
selling the horne and property, price, timing, terms, will be the
sole responsibility of Wife. The home's value was appraised in
December 2003 as $710,000. After paying off remaining mortgage
of $209,000 and subtracting out closing and broker fees,
remaining net proceeds in the home equals $473,271, as of
December 2003. Upon the sale of the horne, Husband will receive
one-half of these net proceeds, totaling $236,636. As of December
2003, wife will be solely responsible for paying monthly mortgage costs and home maintenance costs."

 

[nextwife]

And he was paid the $473,271. and released from the mortgage?

 

[LdiJ]

And he was paid the $473,271. and released from the mortgage?

His share was 236,636, not 473,271.

In a way, I can understand why the ex might have a potential gripe. Almost 28k was deducted to determine the equity, and then his 1/2 share. Obviously there was not 28k in selling costs because she bought him out. Instead, there was only about 7k. The 70,000 in interest is fully her responsibility...there is no sharing there.

However, legally he was due a set amount of money, and if he got that set amount of money he really doesn't have a leg to stand on. If the home's value had gone down, rather than up, he still would have been entitled to that set amount of money after all.

 

[Bali Hai]

His share was 236,636, not 473,271.

In a way, I can understand why the ex might have a potential gripe. Almost 28k was deducted to determine the equity, and then his 1/2 share. Obviously there was not 28k in selling costs because she bought him out. Instead, there was only about 7k. The 70,000 in interest is fully her responsibility...there is no sharing there.

However, legally he was due a set amount of money, and if he got that set amount of money he really doesn't have a leg to stand on. If the home's value had gone down, rather than up, he still would have been entitled to that set amount of money after all.

So you agree that the ex-husbands half of the 28k was inappropriately kept by the wife.

Oh well, it's just another ex-husband getting screwed by the court. No big deal, life goes on.

 

[LdiJ]

So you agree that the ex-husbands half of the 28k was inappropriately kept by the wife.

Oh well, it's just another ex-husband getting screwed by the court. No big deal, life goes on.

No, I don't agree that it was kept inappropriately. He had a specific amount designated as his payoff amount, (which he would have received even if the house had declined in value)so it was proper that he received that amount. I am merely saying that I can understand where he is coming from.

 

[kevinblackwell]

So you agree that the ex-husbands half of the 28k was inappropriately kept by the wife.

Oh well, it's just another ex-husband getting screwed by the court. No big deal, life goes on.

I know this is "free advice", and I guess I am getting what I paying for, but I was not asking for subjective opinions, but legal understanding. Bali Hai, do you have anything constructive to add, even if opposed to my position, instead of your petty sarcasm?

 

[kevinblackwell]

No, I don't agree that it was kept inappropriately. He had a specific amount designated as his payoff amount, (which he would have received even if the house had declined in value)so it was proper that he received that amount. I am merely saying that I can understand where he is coming from.

I agree, I also see his understanding, but the settlement was done between the two (no lawyers), in order to come up with an equitable amount. Her interest was in the house, she waived all rights to 45% of his indexed pension, which were already hers by law ($2800/month) and any alimony that would have ceased in 2006. She wanted only the stability of a home for the kids.

The issue of the thread is whether his subpeona for closing cost information given to the title company is legitamate, given that he signed the subpeona and used the case number on the divorce decree.

Thanks for your and comments thoughts LdiJ

 

[LdiJ]

I agree, I also see his understanding, but the settlement was done between the two (no lawyers), in order to come up with an equitable amount. Her interest was in the house, she waived all rights to 45% of his indexed pension, which were already hers by law ($2800/month) and any alimony that would have ceased in 2006. She wanted only the stability of a home for the kids.

The issue of the thread is whether his subpeona for closing cost information given to the title company is legitamate, given that he signed the subpeona and used the case number on the divorce decree.

Thanks for your and comments thoughts LdiJ

I would think not, unless he has filed paperwork to re-open the property settlement.

 

[Bali Hai]

I know this is "free advice", and I guess I am getting what I paying for, but I was not asking for subjective opinions, but legal understanding. Bali Hai, do you have anything constructive to add, even if opposed to my position, instead of your petty sarcasm?

Constructive opinion:

You can also shoot your mouth off all you want. Your wife screwed someone out of nearly 14k. That is what you are here to boast about and I hope you both ****** on it..

Let your wife come here and speak for herself. Talk about petty.