Legal Question in Family Law in New Jersey

Re: Divorce Settlement

Generally property acquired before a marriage is exempt. However, all general rules have exceptions.

First, a date prior to the marriage ceremony can, in appropriate circumstances, qualify as the date of commencement of the marriage for the purpose of deciding whether property is an asset subject to equitable distribution. The shared enterprise of marriage may begin even before the actual marriage ceremony through the purchase of a major marital asset, such as a house, and substantial improvements to that asset. This conclusion was supported by trial court decisions in Raspa v. Raspa and Coney v. Coney.

If the parties have an intention to create a marital partnership prior to the marriage ceremony with respect to particular property, which would be the equivalent of a business partnership, and if by their combined efforts they increase the value of an asset held by one of them, such increase might be subject to treatment as a partnership interest, and, following marriage, as an asset subject to equitable distribution.

In the landmark decision of Painter v. Painter, the New Jersey Supreme Court stated that property owned by a spouse at the time of marriage would remain the separate property of that spouse and would not be considered an asset subject to equitable distribution on divorce. However, the court included a footnote potentially limiting the immunity from distribution of any enhanced value to that separate property, as, in fact, it has been limited by case law development over the past quarter century.

An increase after marriage in the value of the closely held corporation stock owned by a husband may be eligible for equitable distribution to the extent that it may be attributable to the expenditure of effort by the wife. The stock of a closely held corporation, in contrast to ordinary marketable securities, necessarily derived its value in large part from the husband's personal participation in the business. So far as equitable distribution is concerned, there is no essential difference between an interest in an individual business and one held in a corporate or partnership name. The form of the enterprise should not control.

Moral - you would need to keep very detailed records that any increase in value was due soley to your efforts. And this can be very expensive to prove in a divorce because you would carry the burden to prove it is an exempt asset.

I would be happy to follow up with you. Please call my office if you would like to schedule an appointment either in person or by telephone. My contact information is listed in the links below.

Disclaimer: You can not rely on the advice of an attorney given over the internet. The exact facts of your situation, including facts which you have not mentioned in your question, may completely change the result for your situation.

Re: Divorce Settlement

Premarital assets are not marital assets and are thereby subject to equitable distribution in a divorce, unless. That "unless" is what is descibed as "commingling" which is where your funds/assets are deposited with your wife's assets or you place her name on the assets' accounts, literally gifting them to her. Similarly, if you execute a deed to yourself and

your wife that is also commingling.

Call me if you like.

Gary Moore, Esquire

Hackensack, New Jersey

www.garymooreattorneyatlaw.com

Re: Divorce Settlement

You also have to consider that most divorces end up in a settlement. Thus, if you do get divorced, you may wind up giving up some of that money anyway. You may also run into problems if you add to those funds and they gain interest or if you buy something with those funds. You could wind up getting into a dispute over all of that. I would keep everything seperate and just never add to it or withdraw any of it.

I'm not going to tell you to run your life, but I would give this a lot of thought before you rush into anything.