Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Senior Divorce: Special Circumstances
Seniors are divorcing with greater frequency. Divorce is different for seniors than for younger married couples. The issues of visitation and child support that dominate divorces of many younger couples are not present; instead, seniors face their own unique issues with which professionals must grapple. The following is a discussion of some of the many nuances that are more unique to seniors ' and some of the planning implications those advising seniors should consider.
Residences
The nature of seniors' assets is likely to be different. The marital residence is much more likely to have substantial appreciation so that planning to minimize the tax costs of selling a home will be relevant. In contrast, for a younger couple, dealing with a large mortgage is the more common concern. Seniors are more likely to have a second or third home. They may be far more likely to sell their homes and both move to smaller condominiums, perhaps in different states. How do you preserve the $500,000 capital gains exclusion? There are special rules on the division of a house, but most of the special exceptions pertain to the common divorce situation of younger couples ' namely, one spouse remaining in the house with young children, while both continue to own it. When seniors divorce, each spouse may take a different home. It is also common for seniors to sell the marital home, lock in the $500,000 exclusion, and each buy a new smaller home or condominium.
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.