Make my ex sign

[BelizeBreeze]

There is very little in the way of case law regarding the rights of the court to order the signing of the 8332 or any other contract. and, as a matter of law, I doubt seriously that such exists.

In fact, the reason I answered as I did is because, until the filing and proof that the ex refuses to execute the document, there is no breach of the order.

The only option in this situation is to file as suggested and if/when there is express refusal to execute the form 8332 (evidenced by RRR) File for relief in the state court, including sanctions.

 

[tranquility]

The footnotes referenced in my previous post:
16/ See, e.g., Hart v. Hart, 774 S.W.2d 455 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989); Fleck v. Fleck, 427 N.W.2d 355 (N.D. Ct. App. 1988); Lincoln v. Lincoln, 746 P.2d 13 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987); Fudenberg v. Molstad, 390 N.W.2d 19 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).


17/ See, e.g., Gamble v. Gamble, 562 So. 2d 1343 (Ala. Civ. App. 1990); In re Marriage of Feustel, 467 N.W.2d 261 (Iowa 1991); Monterey County v. Cornejo, 812 P.2d 586 (Cal. 1991); In re Marriage of Larsen, 805 P.2d 1195 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991); Cohen v. Cohen, 396 S.E.2d 344 (N.C. Ct. App. 1990); Serrano v. Serrano, 566 A.2d 413 (Conn. 1989); Rohr v. Rohr, 800 P.2d 85 (Idaho 1990); Wassif v. Wassif, 551 A.2d 935 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1989); Hart v. Hart, 774 S.W.2d 455 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989); Bailey v. Bailey, 540 N.E.2d 187 (Mass. Ct. App. 1989); In re Marriage of Einhorn, 533 N.E.2d 29 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988); Babka v. Babka, 452 N.W.2d 286 (Neb. 1990); In re Marriage of Milesnick, 765 P.2d 751 (Mont. 1988); Fudenberg v. Molstad, 390 N.W.2d 19 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986); Fleck v. Fleck, 427 N.W.2d 355 (N.D. 1988); Hughes v. Hughes, 518 N.E.2d 1213 (Ohio 1988); In re Pea****, 771 P.2d 767 (Wash. Ct. App. 1989); Cross v. Cross, 363 S.E.2d 449 (W. Va. 1987); Pergolski v. Pergolski 420 N.W.2d 414 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988).


18/ See Brandriet v. Larsen, 442 N.W.2d 455 (S. Dak. 1989); Davis v Fair, 707 S.W.2d 711 (Tex. Ct. App. 1986).


19/ Jensen v. Jensen, 753 P.2d 342 (Nev. 1988); McKenzie v. Kinsey, 532 So. 2d 98 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988); Lorenz v. Lorenz, 419 N.W.2d 770 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988); Echele v. Echele, 782 S.W.2d 430 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989); Gleason v. Michlitsch, 728 P.2d 965 (Or. Ct. App. 1986); Brandriet v Larsen, 442 N.W.2d 455 (S. Dak. 1989); Davis v Fair, 707 S.W.2d 711 (Tex. Ct. App. 1986); Fullmer v. Fullmer, 761 P.2d 942 (Utah 1988).

 

[BelizeBreeze]

The only Kentucky case on point in the citations was Hart v. Hart.

Trial court did not abuse its discretion by awarding the tax exemption for child to his father. The trial court has discretion to allocate the tax exemption between the spouses. See Pegler v. Pegler, Ky. App., 895 S.W.2d 580, 581 (1995). Further, "[a] trial court should allocate the exemption so as to maximize the amount available for the care of the children." Hart v. Hart, Ky. App., 774 S.W.2d 455, 457 (1989). The amount and duration and maintenance shall be set by a trial court after considering all relevant factors, including those set forth in KRS 403.200(2)(a)-(f).

Nothing in Hart or the precident cited gives the court leave to order one party to sign or execute the document. as a matter of law, the court can only interprete the plain language of a contract or force execution of the orders of the court.

 

[JETX]

See 'Denton v Denton', 2004-CA-000619-MR, at:
http://opinions.kycourts.net/coa/2004-CA-000619.pdf

The point to all of this is... (as has been said several times by RESPONSIBLE forum members) and summarized below:
Write your ex a very nice letter (include a copy of IRS form 8332) and POLITELY insist that she sign it as provided in your family court order. Include that if she doesn't do so, she could be found in contempt of the court... and subject to sanctions (costs). Also, include that you are claiming the exemption as provided by order and that if she also claims the deduction, the IRS will determine who gets the exemption upon review of the court order and could be subject to tax penalties if they rule against her.
Then if she signs and returns, great.

If not, then you have to decide your next action. Personally, I would go ahead and take the deductions as allowed by the order and let the IRS pursue which parent is entitled to the deduction (assuming she also claims). If you get a notice of audit, the IRS will absolutely look at your court order and very likely rule on the issue in your favor.

And of course, NONE of this has anything to do with H&R Block. If they insist they can't process your filing without resolving this first, get your records and go buy 'TurboTax' or TaxCut. They are both good tax preparation packages for the majority of tax payers.