Arizona Family Law Lawyer & Attorney : NRG - Nirenstein Ruotolo Group

DES v. Hayden, 427 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 3, ___ Ariz. ___, ___P.2d ___ (Ct. App., Div. 1, 06/08/04).

If unpaid child support judgments have not been reduced to a written judgment within 3 years of the emancipation of the child in question, the statute of limitations set forth in A.R.S. Section 25-503(I) may prohibit the collection of a judgment through the courts, but the State can still pursue statutory administrative remedies to collect the debt until the debt is paid.

Click here to read the full opinion.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

This case has great implications to those spouses out their who think that they can beat the divorce court by taking all of the debt in a divorce action and then run over to the bankruptcy court and have it discharged.

In Birt v. Birt, the Husband's filing of a Chapter 7 Bankrutpcy approximately two months after the entry of the parties Decree of Dissolution resulting in Wife being obligated to pay all community debt and remaining liable for property equalization payments to Husband, created "such a substantial injustice that it overrides the committment to finality of judgments and on the factsof this case call for relief under Rule 60(c)(6).".

The trial court on remand, was directed to determine: (1) Whether to affirm an award of attorney's fees and clarify whether it is in the nature of nondischargeable maintenance or support rather than part of a property division; (2) Whether the bankruptcy discharge resulting in the doubling of Wife's ultimate liability on community debts requires an award of spousal maintenance to Wife; (3) Whether the discharged creditors have reached any agreements with Wife to limit the Wife's obligation on the debts; (4) Whether to reallocate property, debts or equalization payments; and (5) Whether the original allocations were in the nature of spousal maintenance or child support rather than a simple division of property and debt.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

A marriage that is invalid under the law where the ceremony occurred may nevertheless be recognized as valid in Arizona if it would have been valid had the ceremony been performed there, the Arizona Court of Appeals decided in Donlann v. Macgurn, Ariz. Ct. App., No. 1 CA-CV 01-0095, 9/12/02).

The parties participated in a marriage ceremony in 1990 during a vacation in Puerto Vallerta, Jalisco, Mexico. They obtained the necessary blood tests and marriage certificate in Mexico. Their marriage certificate was signed by a civil registry official; however, the marriage ceremony was performed by a woman who was not an authorized member of the civil registry office.

The couple returned to Arizona and resided together after the wedding. When the wife petitioned for divorce in 1997, the husband claimed that their marriage was invalid under Jalisco law because the wedding was not performed by a civil registry official. The trial court agreed and the wife appealed.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments