Legal Question in Family Law in Kansas

Treating proceeds and profit as the same thing, is tricky, although in some case they are the same amount. In your case, it appears that you and your ex had a house with a mortgage. Teh judge entering yoru divorce decree can divide up the equity in the house, but not the mortgage obligation (at least as to the lender) so you were each obligated on the house. Say for example, when you divorced, teh house was worth $110k and the mortgage balance was $90k. You two had $10k in equity. The economy goes in the dump and the house won't sell for as much. If he could sell it for $92k he would owe you $2k. But the house sells $90k so all the money (proceeds) go to the secured lender. Although there were technically proceeds. you would not be able to disgorge them from the lender by legal force. The buyer will nto close unless your lender releases their lien. If your ex is wanting to sell the house for more than is owed, he should pay you your $2k before deductng what he has paid to repair or keep up the property. he probably can decuct costs of selling ( inspection, title work, realtor/broker fee, etc)

One can argue that there is a (you got to live in the house rent free) argument when an ex spouse gets out from under a mortgage debt (assuming your ex got told to pay the mortgage in the decree) when he sold the house, and you are still paying on our apportionment of the marital debt. He can counter that

This may seem very confusing. If so, perhaps your divorce attorney can explain ti better.

The real question may be: "is he selling the house for too little?" Houses in most parts of the country are not worth what they were two years ago. There are many diffenret formulas that people us in litigation to determine the value that shoud be imputed to a house. Many attorney sare getting rich arguing over the use of this determination or that determination, and clients are going broke.

If your Decree valued the house at a certian level with an expectation that your ex would profit when the house is sold, you might be able to argue that he shoud be apportioned more of the marital debt, if he is unable to pay you your expectation at the time of sale. He may be able to argue (if he has been paying the mortgage payment) that you should be apportioned more of the marital debt, as he has been paying the morgage and will not see anything from it. it doe snto appar taht your decree anticiapted you getting a specific amount, as it doe snto read "Wife gets $2,000 when the house is sold" The profit argument comes in because it say s "from the proceeds of the sale" If all the money is going to the lender, then there wasn't really any proceeds (profit) from which to give you $2,000.

Your cleares way to determine if the house is sellign way less that it should, is if you or yoru friends are willign to buy the house at a dollar more than what he says he is selling it for. If you or a friend think you can flip it and make a quick profit, then the house is probably selling too low. If you (or a firend wiht money) is not willign to buy it at $1 more thatn he is wslling it, purely as a shor term investment, then you probably agree more with how your ex has valued the property, then you want to admit.