4/19/2023 0 Comments Dwd discovery pro se wisconsinTherefore, Jeffery did not make full disclosure as required by Wis. 2d 532, 525 N.W.2d 261 (1995), the trust income was available for child support. The appellate court held that, under Wisconsin Admin. Anderson wrote that, had Jeffrey fully disclosed his assets at the time of the divorce, the trial court would have set child support at a drastically different level. Anderson, the state Court of Appeals affirmed. In a decision by Presiding Judge Daniel P. ‘Obstructive Behavior’ Influences the Outcome Jeffrey was also ordered to pay Tina’s attorney fees of approximately $15,000. The trial court granted Tina’s motion to reopen the judgment of divorce to adjust the child support determination and ordered Jeffrey to pay retroactive child support from 1997 through 2003, including 12 percent interest commencing from the filing date of Tina’s motion to reopen and continuing until the judgment was satisfied in full. In May 2006, Tina filed a motion to reopen the judgment of divorce, claiming that Jeffrey deliberately failed to disclose his income and assets during the divorce. In February 2007, by stipulation of the parties, the court approved an order increasing child support. After repeated requests that Jeffrey comply, Tina filed a motion to compel discovery and increase child support in 2004. In 2003, Tina filed a request for production of documents based on her contention that a substantial change in circumstances existed warranting an increase in child support. In the marital settlement agreement, he agreed to pay $512 per month for child support, and, based on this information, a judgment of divorce was granted in 1997. Before their divorce, they each filed financial disclosure statements with their respective incomes, but Jeffrey did not report any trust interests. A petition for divorce was filed in 1996. Jeffrey and Tina Stevenson married in 1992 and had one child. This article will summarize the holding next week’s column will critique it. The decision affirmed the order rendered by Winnebago County Circuit Court Judge Barbara H. He has finally been caught.” See Stevenson v. Stevenson, who “played a game of ‘cat and mouse’ with the court for nine years. II Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision, it was evident that it was not going to be good news for Jeffery B. From the first two sentences of a recent Dist.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |