Introduction Roberta F. Salzman and Erwin Bachrach decided to build a home together after being in a relationship for several years. Erwin sold his condominium and received about $100,000 from the sale. Together they purchased a residential lot for $49,000. Each person contributed 50 percent for the land. Erwin Bachrach was a designer and drafter of residential properties for fifty years. Bachrach designed the couple 's new home. To the home he contributed 167,528.86 dollars. Roberta Salzman contributed 353,347.64 dollars to the purchase of the home (Colorado Supreme Court, 2000). Bachrach gave over his interest of the home to Salzman. At that point of time, Salzman closed the sale of her townhouse. Bachrach giving over the deed to Salzman at the time served two functions. Giving over the deed allowed her to obtain a favorable mortgage on the home and provided tax advantages. About six months later this helped Salzman continue to receive a monthly maintenance payment from her ex-husband (Colorado Supreme Court, 2000). Because Salzman was living with another man, in a relationship, and had joint home ownership, her ex-husband was going to end the payments through the court system. To continue receiving these payments, Bachrach wrote to Salzman’s ex-husband to explain that there was neither marriage nor plans to enter into matrimony. They lived together for convenience and companionship. The two had separate finances. Bachrach wrote that she alone owned the
Their land was appraised and found to be worth $560,000. (No entry due to no accounting transaction occurred)
Amanda offered John market value for his share which she did not have to do. According to Bankton, Amanda could have stated any price. The market value of a property has only become more substantial in later modern cases. As Craig Anderson states: “In the modern cases, by contrast, what has typically been asked is simply for the defender to be compelled to sell up to the pursuer at a market valuation.” An example of a modern case which has similar circumstances to the present case of Amanda and John is the case of Gray v Kerner. In Gray v Kerner ‘a house was co-owned by the parties and after the breakdown of their relationship the pursuer sought to buy out the defenders shares and for his share of mortgage payments. The defender, however, wanted divison and sale of the property. The sheriff sided with the pursuer as her family life should not be disrupted by biding on the house in an open market and no inconvenience was caused to the defender.’ This is a significant case as the facts of the case are similar to that of Amanda
For most of United States history, people considered property a man’s game. Upon marriage, the majority of property owned by colonial women transferred from the control of their father, or other male relative, to that of their new husband. With the exception
| 21 |LO 4 |Basis for inherited property: community property vs common law | |Unchanged | 21 |
Imagine a woman with powdery, permed hair who smells of hairspray and flowery potpourri. She is an 87-year-old mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother who has found a new home at a retirement facility after her husband of 56 years passed away, but now that home is being taken from her. In its 48 years, Oaknoll, a retirement home and care facility located in Iowa City, has been a home for hundreds of residents. As a nonprofit organization, Oaknoll has little to offer the city financially. It does not pay property taxes and sits upon prime property along bustling Benton and Oakcrest streets. With the closing of Oaknoll, Iowa City plans to sell the land, potentially valued at over three million dollars, to private owners for the construction
In 1830 the Blow family and I moved from Florence, Alabama to St. Louis, Missouri where we opened up a Hotel. On June 23, 1832 Peter Blow, who was my first owner, died at the age of 40 (Herda). His wife then sold us to John Emerson, an army surgeon. I lived with John Emerson in St.Louis until we moved to Illinois in 1836. In 1838 Mr. Emerson and I moved to Wisconsin, where I met my wife, Harriet Robinson. A few years later we moved back to Missouri. In 1843 my second owner, John Emerson, died, and all of Mr.Emerson's property went to his wife, who sold us to her step-brother, Captain Henry Bainbridge, until March of 1846 when I requested to buy my freedom and was denied (Herda). A month later, on April 6, 1846 my wife and I filed petitions in the Missouri Circuit Court to get permission to sue against my late owner’s widow,
When you review various curricular plans, you may see a variety of terms. Some programs use the term “program outcomes” while others use the term “terminal objectives” for those actions that the student is expected to accomplish upon graduation. The same is true for individual courses. Some programs call the knowledge and skills that a student should master by the end of the course “course outcomes” while others use the term “course objectives.” All of the terms have a specified definition in literature and according to accreditation agencies. What are the similarities and differences between the terms according to the literature and to accrediting agencies? Select a program or course (other than GCU) and critique their use of these terms. Do they use them in a manner consistent with the literature and/or accreditation agencies or do they use them differently? Include your review of the program in your response to this discussion question. Support your response with literature. Your critique could be at the program level or at the course level. You do not need to do both levels.
Claudia Renfro received tree farm property from her mother during the marriage, unlike Frank whose property was rewarded before his marriage. During the testimony, the chancellor determined the property is marital property. Chancellor states in her final judgement that Claudia “indicated that the development and management of the property as a tree farm was for providing income for the parties’ retirement,” which changes the once nonmarital property to marital property. The chancellor found the total value of the real and person property, and awarded each party half of the total to each party.
The organisation, Gerard Cassegrain & Co Pty Ltd, claimed a dairy farm in New South Wales. The Husband, in his ability as executive of the organisation, exchanged title of the land to both himself and his wife as joint occupants in like manner. The spouse later moved his enthusiasm for the property to his wife for $1. An Application was brought by the organisation against the spouse and wife in the New South Wales Supreme Court looking for that the property be exchanged back to the organisation because of fraudulent activities of the spouse. The trial judge requested that the spouse pay remuneration to the organisation, however dismissed the procedures against the wife as she herself was not a knowing party to the fraud.
The first case shows that Martin had bought the mountain property 31 years ago as the joint tenant with his friends. The friends of Martin is passed away already and he had not been in the property for more than 20 years. The actions taken by Martin clearly indicates that he was not careful about the property and other people used it for their own purpose. The law shows that “Placing property in joint tenancy may disinherit children or others since property held in joint tenancy passes to the survivor regardless of what the deceased joint tenant's Will or Trust directs and regardless of whom the decedent's heirs are under law. Usually it is a person’s intent to leave their property to their spouse and then to their children.
Born in Svitavy, Moravia on April 28, 1908. Schindler was born to an ethnic Catholic German family. He and his family remained in Svitavy during the interwar period. He gained Czech citizenship after the Morvania joined the Czechoslovak Republic in 1918. In 1928 he married Emilie Pelzel. He also had many jobs like working at his father's farm machinery business in Svitavy, opening a driving school, selling government property in Brno. He also served in the Czech army in 1938 he became the rank of lance corporal in the reserve. Also in 1938 Schindler joined the Nazi party after Germany annexed the Sudetenland. He worked with the office of the military Foreign Intelligence. However, in the film, Schindler’s list, Schindler is depicted as a dynamic character who is all about himself and no one else.
Schindler he was adored by young women. He met a young girl named Emily. And after six weeks they were soon married. After a few months of marriage, Schindler began to heavily drink. He also had four affairs resulting in two children out of marriage. In 1929 his family’s business went bankrupt. And finding himself jobless Schindler looked for work as a machine salesman in
1. Family owned business is a business that is owned by one family, most of the shareholders are from the same family. One of the major problems in this type of business is a conflict in interests among the family’s member. The auditor should be careful and observe the type of the relationship among the family’s member. There should be a written agreement to specify rights, duties, and obligations for each member, the auditor should read those documents for further information. One issue that faced the auditor is to understand the attitude of each member, the risk of manipulating facts can be existed due to the close relationship. In the case of Jack Greenberg, the son has manipulated the numbers in the record
Hansen Consulting proudly presents the following statistical information for Otto’s Auto parts. Statistics is a branch of mathematics that makes it possible for you to gain an edge over your competitors by providing a method for collection of data, and a way to summarize and quantify it to represent real world observations from which predictions can be made. Statistics also includes stochastic modeling, which is a powerful tool that incorporates random variables to predict future outcomes. For decades insurance companies have successfully profited from using stochastic modeling for making predictions of unknown entities. Stochastic models can be run hundreds or even thousands of times to show the