How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask socrateaser Your Own Question
socrateaser, Lawyer
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 38911
Experience:  Retired (mostly)
Type Your Legal Question Here...
socrateaser is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

can you send me or where can I get a judges ruling in a divorce

This answer was rated:

can you send me or where can I get a judges ruling in a divorce case where a quit claim deed put in place years prior to a divorce is upheld in divorce court. I cant be the first person who has had this situation arise and some say I need a prior ruling to solidify the issue but I do not understand that statement because the quit claim to the property is cut and dry, black and white, recorded with the county, and there is numerous documents that support the fact the my spouse fully understood what rights were being signed away. Any case law on this out there??? Can I get this some how? Not being a paralegal I try to search but I Am having no luck. Thank you in advance for any and all help with this. It means alot

I have comprehensive access to the Westlaw® proprietary legal research system -- one of the two largest legal research databases in the world. I have conducted a search of Pennsylvania appellate case law, and I'm actually quite surprised to find that there is no appellate case that discusses a quitclaim deed with respect to validity during a divorce. There may, of course, be many family court cases where judges have made determinations of the validity of a quitclaim in divorce -- just no specific appellate court cases.

However, there is a precedent case that you can use, because it covers all potential postmarital transfers and agreements concerning property, regardless of how the transfer is made.

In Laudig v. Laudig, 425 Pa. Superior Ct. 228, 624 A. 2d 651 (PA Super. 4/28/1993), the PA Superior Court determined the factors which validate "postnuptial" transfers of property between spouses, and held that: The paramount goal of contract interpretation is to "ascertain and give effect to the parties' intent." Lyons v. Lyons, supra 401 Pa.Super. at 277, 585 A.2d at 45. To accomplish this goal, "each and every part of [the contract] must be taken into consideration and given effect, if possible, and the intention of the parties must be ascertained from the entire instrument." In order to ascertain the intention of the parties, "the court may take into consideration the surrounding circumstances, the situation of the parties, the objects they apparently have in view, and the nature of the subject-matter of the agreement." The court will adopt an interpretation that is most reasonable and probable bearing in mind the objects which the parties intended to accomplish through the agreement. Wrenfield Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. DeYoung, 410 Pa.Super. 621, 627, 600 A.2d 960, 963 (1991) (quoted and cited cases omitted).

In plain English, if you can show that the intent of the quitclaim at the time it was made was to effect some agreed-upon purpose, then the court must sustain the property transfer, and rule that your interest is separate, and not marital property, subject to equitable dissolution.

So, there you have it. Please let me know if my answer is helpful, or if I can provide you with further clarification or assistance.

And, thanks for using!
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

Thank You Very Much! Well I dont know if you can get into previous questions posted from me concerning this same situation from around april of this year. That will give more detail as to what is going on. In short here is the situation:

Couple gets married, Husband has a business that owns the property.(corporation owned) upon marriage Wife finds out husbands company is going under and HUSBAND has a Lien against him for 750,000 dollars. Wife took her premarital money and purchased the property from the corporation solely in her name and had Husband sign a quit claim deed. Property was purchased at fair market value from company.


Then she found out she was named as JANE DOE in lien against her husband and it cost her 75,000 to get removed from being a "spouse" attached to this lien. Over the years the property was remortgaged and each time the HUSBAND resigen a quit claim deed back over to the Wife. I believe 6 quit claims exist. The property was found to have oil in the ground and over the years oil company had leased land with intent to drill. He has always known this and still assigned the quit claims. SO in this case it is not "POST-MARITAL" but given the circumstance here it appears the INTENT is clear as the husband new he could have no marital interest in this property as the lien against him would have cost him the home and property. With given the above information would you say as you wrote the section about "IN Plain English " in your answer that this covers it or would more need to be shown. She has all documentation about the corporate sale, Premarital money, his lien/judgement aginst him, Her paying to be removed as Jane Doe, all recorded quit claim deeds and even the oil company has done extensive research and they concluded the property is solely hers. and will not even address the HUSBAND. Who also had been removed from the property by a court judgement. Hope I am not getting to convoluted. Greatly appreciate your work/assistance with this. God Bless and I look forward to your reply.

The term, "postmarital," means anything that occurs after parties are married and prior to divorce or legal separation. Everything you describe is, therefore, "postmarital," and subject to the Laudig precedent.

The original transaction of purchasing the property with premarital/separate assets and obtaining a quitclaim clearly evidences the intent that the property remain separate. The remortgaging/refinancing could provide a stumbling block -- but only if husband was named as a borrower on the loans. If wife mortgaged the property as the sole borrower, followed by a quitclaim by husband, then it would be obvious that the intent of the parties was to maintain the property as entirely the separate property of wife.

Based upon the allegations provided here, Laudig is the applicable case law precedent, and it seems extremely "cut and dried" to me as to the court's likely ruling in the case: the mineral rights on the land are wife's separate property.

Naturally, this is lousy for husband, at least with respect to property division. On the other hand, if there is an issue of spousal support/alimony in play, wife's potentially greater income and assets created by provable oil reserves, could operate to give husband a right to receive ongoing support after divorce.

If you want to discuss the spousal support issue, please open a new question and put my userid in the first sentence of the question (e.g., "To socrateaser, only"). I'm mentioning this issue to be thorough -- though, in fairness, it's out of scope of the original question, and requires separate treatment and compensation.

Hope this helps.
socrateaser and 2 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

Thank you again, I think this covers everything that needed. Only looking for the ruling on property ownership. This is excellent and much thanks again!!!

Customer: replied 3 years ago.

I did give you the rating do not know why it is not showing on your end. When I view the threat the excellent service rating is what shows

Hello again,

I am guessing from your replies that you are receiving correspondence asking you for something, and that the correspondence appears to be sent by me.

I have not sent any correspondence to you, since 10/20/2013. Anything that you have received is from the website operator. I have repeatedly asked the website not to send correspondence to customers, which appears to be sent by me -- however, the website has routinely ignored my requests. Consequently, all I can do is to apologize for any inconvenience, and suggest that you simply ignore any future correspondence you receive, unless you actually ask me a question -- in which case, of course, I will be happy to answer.

You may also contact customer service and demand that they stop sending further correspondence to you. They are required to follow your request, pursuant to federal law.

Best wishes, and thanks again for your understanding.