Lommen V. Lommen
Dec 01, 2015OUTCOME: Trial Court ruling affirmed
Case dismissed where ex-Husband sought to terminate spousal support based on ex-Wife's alleged cohabitation.
Sheera Rachel Herrell's Legal Cases (3)
Virginia Beach, VA
Family Lawyer at Virginia Beach, VA
Practice Areas: Family, Alimony ... +2 more
Parish v. Parish, 281 Va. 191
Jan 13, 2011OUTCOME: Affirmed
From Lexis: On appeal the son assigned error to the circuit court's ruling that the deceased's adjudications of incompetence did not invoke a presumption that he lacked capacity. The court found that ... the mere fact that one was under a conservatorship was not an adjudication of insanity and did not create a presumption of incapacity. None of the conservator statutes at issue, former Fla. Stat. § 744.331, Tenn. Code Ann. § 34-1-101(7), or Va. Code Ann. § 37.2-1000, required a specific factual finding that the deceased was incompetent to such an extent that he could not execute a will. Accordingly, the circuit court correctly ruled that the deceased's adjudications of incompetence due to encephalopathy and the attendant appointments of conservators did not create a presumption of incapacity. The testimony of the paralegal who assisted the deceased in drafting the will that the deceased knew what he was doing when he signed the will, and the testimony of the treating physician that the deceased could understand what property he owned and to whom he was giving it, was sufficient to support the circuit court's ruling that the co-conservators proved the deceased's testamentary capacity. Outcome The judgment of the circuit court was affirmed. Parish v. Parish, 281 Va. 191, 194, 704 S.E.2d 99, 101, 2011 Va. LEXIS 21, *1 (Va. 2011)
Noce v. Noce
Apr 11, 2006OUTCOME: Trial Court ruling affirmed
From Lexis: Husband argued that the trial court erred in not granting the divorce on the grounds of wife's adultery. The appellate court found that the parties had been separated in excess of one year ... when the trial court granted the divorce on this ground. There were no grounds for reversing the decision of the trial court. The evidence of the wife's alleged adultery did not rise above the level of speculation and suspicion. The husband asserted he paid approximately $ 8,000 towards the second mortgage following the parties' separation. However, he provided no evidence as to the source of the funds he used to pay down the mortgage, and the amortization schedule he introduced indicated he had paid only $ 850 towards the mortgage. The husband's failure to demonstrate he used his separate funds to pay down the mortgage, his inability to accurately document the amount of his payments, and his exclusive use of the property post-separation supported the trial court's decision not to grant husband credit for the post-separation payments. Outcome The judgment was affirmed. Noce v. Noce, 2006 Va. App. LEXIS 149, *1, 2006 WL 908062 (Va. Ct. App. Apr. 11, 2006)
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
