2-Hour Personal Financial Management Instructional Course

 1 After Filing

Satisfy Your Credit Counseling Requirement Before Filing Bankruptcy

1 Before Filing

The trial court’s classification of various accounts as the wife’s non-marital property was against the manifest weight of the evidence since balance statements provided the trial court with a recent balance for each of the accounts but clearly failed to satisfy the tracing requirement of affirmatively identifying the source of the funds. In re Didier

 A trial court abused its discretion in granting injunctive relief where that relief did not preserve the status quo of the parties for purposes of equitable distribution of property.  In re Schwartz
 A mandatory injunction was not necessary to preserve the status quo in terms of the condition of the apartment which had served as the marital domicile prior to the wife’s unilateral removal of the furnishings; disruption to the status quo by itself does not mandate the issuance of injunctive relief, and husband must also establish the existence of a certain and ascertainable legal right, irreparable injury and an inadequate remedy at law.  In re Sherwin
See Divorce Dallas

 Where the marriage lasted only six years and petitioner presented evidence in the form of receipts for at least some of the improvements she claimed were made, the trial court must determine based on the evidence already presented whether those contributions to the marital estate made to respondent’s non-marital residence were clearly proved, and whether the marital estate had already been compensated; the amounts proved as credited to the marital estate and divided according to the provisions of this section.  In re Albrecht

 Where the court merely withdrew its finding of transmutation and affirmed award of money as being based upon wife’s share of marital property accumulated during marriage and as fair reimbursement of the wife’s share of marital contributions, this was an abuse of discretion, in the subdivision (c)(2) unequivocally required that reimbursement for marital contributions must be traceable by clear and convincing evidence.  In re Harmon
 Where petitioner’s award was approximately 25% of the estate, under the specific circumstances of the case, the court’s disposition was an abuse of discretion.  In re Hobbs
 The court abuse its discretion in failing to award all of the marital property.  In re Hobbs
 The trial court abused its discretion in dividing the marital property as if obligations from daughters represented bona fide accounts receivable with values established with equal certainty to other marital assets.  In re Smith