Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Litigation
Military Pension and Veterans' Benefits
Although a state court is not authorized to treat military pay waived to receive veterans' disability benefits as marital property subject to equitable distribution, a state court may order a party to pay a sum equivalent to the portion of the military pay received as veterans benefits as long as the veterans' disability payments are not ordered to serve as the source of those payments. Poziombke v. Poziombke, Record No. 0050-05-1, Court of Appeals of Virginia, Feb. 14, 2006.
The parties were divorced in 1995. At that time, the husband was on active military duty and was receiving neither military retirement nor disability payments. The divorce decree provided that the wife was entitled to about 28% of the husband's 'disposable retirement/retainer' benefit when received. The final decree was entered without exception or objection. The husband retired in June 1998 and paid the wife the benefit as stated in the decree. Thereafter, in October 1998, the husband began to receive a Veterans' Administration disability benefit, which reduced the amount of his 'disposable retirement/retainer' benefit in an amount equal to the disability benefit. As a result, the wife only re-ceived 28% of the reduced retirement benefit. She then sought 28% of the husband's disability benefits. In 2005, the court held that the 1995 divorce decree was final and ordered the husband to pay to the wife all sums to which she would have been entitled had he not taken disability payments. However, the court did not order that the source of the funds be from the veterans' disability payments. The husband appealed, and the appellate court affirmed. It held that a state court is not authorized to treat military pay waived to receive veterans' disability benefits as marital property subject to equitable distribution. However, a state court may order a party to pay a sum equivalent to the portion of the military pay received as veterans' benefits as long as the veterans' disability payments are not ordered to serve as the source of those payments.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
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.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.