Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
'Double Dipping' Rejected in Calculating Child Support
Finding a lack of authority on the issue of “double dipping” in child support awards, Justice Robert A. Ross of the Nassau County Supreme Court found in a case decided earlier this year that the public policy against “miscalculations” in distributive awards demanded that the amount the husband paid the wife for his enhanced earnings capacity could not be computed as part of his income in determining his child support payments. Goodman v. Goodman, 201099-00. Justice Ross' decision also held that since the enhanced earnings capacity award should not be calculated as income for the husband in the case, the portion going to the wife must be determined as her income for purposes of determining a child custody award. The double-dipping issue arises when courts, in determining the amount of child support a non-custodial spouse owes, do not exempt from the non-custodial spouse's income the amount he or she must pay out in an enhanced earnings capacity award to the custodial spouse.
In reaching his decision, Justice Ross turned to two court of appeals cases, which held that enhanced earnings capacity could not be used in calculating maintenance awards. Although McSparron v. McSparron, 87 NY2d 75, and Grunfeld v. Grunfeld, 94 NY2d 696, did not specifically include child support in their ban against double-dipping, Justice Ross reasoned that the cases' general warnings for courts to guard against duplication in maintenance awards warranted his finding.
New York state courts apply the doctrine of enhanced earnings capacity, which is recognized by only a few jurisdictions, to divorcing spouses who have earned a degree, professional license or other income booster during the life of the marriage. The source of much expert testimony and litigation in divorce actions, enhanced earnings capacity is intended to distribute fairly the boosted future income, computed up to retirement age, which the non-titled spouse in some way assisted the titled spouse in obtaining.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.