equitable distribution claim in North Carolina

2021BRADFORD 2021-NCCOA-447 Opinion of the Court equitable distribution claim was “not timely filed, and [is] therefore barred as a matter of law.” Id. at 434 , 614 S.E.2d at 439 .

2021BRADFORD 2021-NCCOA-447 Opinion of the Court equitable distribution claim was “not timely filed, and [is] therefore barred as a matter of law.” Id. at 434 , 614 S.E.2d at 439 .

2021Cf. id. at 28 , 641 S.E.2d at 335–36 (“Recognizing that ‘[t]here is nothing in the statute regarding the sufficiency of the pleadings to support a claim for equitable distribution[,]’ our Supreme Court also acknowledged that ‘equitable distribution is not automatic[,]’ and that a party seeking such division of marital property ‘must specifically apply for it.’” (citation omitted (alterations in original))).

2021Cf. id. at 28 , 641 S.E.2d at 335–36 (“Recognizing that ‘[t]here is nothing in the statute regarding the sufficiency of the pleadings to support a claim for equitable distribution[,]’ our Supreme Court also acknowledged that ‘equitable distribution is not automatic[,]’ and that a party seeking such division of marital property ‘must specifically apply for it.’” (citation omitted (alterations in original))).

2021BRADFORD 2021-NCCOA-447 Opinion of the Court the court can enter a valid order.” Collins v. Collins, 18 N.C.

2021BRADFORD 2021-NCCOA-448 Opinion of the Court the court can enter a valid order.” Collins v. Collins, 18 N.C.

2015The plaintiff based his argument upon Wall v. Wall, 140 N.C.App. 303 , 536 S.E.2d 647 (2000), in which this Court held that a nineteen-month delay by the trial court between an equitable distribution hearing and entry of an equitable distribution order had violated the defendant's rights.

2015The plaintiff based his argument upon Wall v. Wall, 140 N.C.App. 303 , 536 S.E.2d 647 (2000), in which this Court held that a nineteen-month delay by the trial court between an equitable distribution hearing and entry of an equitable distribution order had violated the defendant's rights.

2022Id.

2022Id.

2019Brewer v. Nelson , 179 N.C.

2019Brewer v. Nelson, 179 N.C.

2006Jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be conferred upon a court by consent, waiver or estoppel.”); DeGree v. DeGree, 72 N.C.

2003Jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be conferred upon a court by consent, waiver or estoppel.”); DeGree v. DeGree, 72 N.C.

1994The court held that the trial court could not "nullify the consequences of defendant's failure to assert her claim for equitable distribution prior to the entry of judgment of divorce." Id. at 446 , 402 S.E.2d at 472 .

1994The court held that the trial court could not "nullify the consequences of defendant's failure to assert her claim for equitable distribution prior to the entry of judgment of divorce." Id. at 446 , 402 S.E.2d at 472 .

2023Plaintiff asserts the trial court’s conclusion of law stands in direct contradiction to the holdings in Perlow v. Perlow, 128 B.R. 412 (E.D.N.C. 1991), Justice v. Justice, 123 N.C.

2023Plaintiff asserts the trial court’s conclusion of law stands in direct contradiction to the holdings in Perlow v. Perlow, 128 B.R. 412 (E.D.N.C. 1991), Justice v. Justice, 123 N.C.

2019An interlocutory order, on the other hand, is one made during the pendency of an action which does not dispose of the case, but leaves it for further action by the trial court in order to settle and determine the entire controversy. *867 Cagle v. Teachy , 111 N.C.

2018App. ----, ----, 796 S.E.2d 811 , 815 ("Concerning the required separation of the parties as a prerequisite for jurisdiction to adjudicate an equitable distribution claim, there is no indication in the record that the parties were separated at the time plaintiff filed her complaint.

2018Id . at ----, 799 S.E.2d at 899 .

2017Id. at 595 , 521 S.E.2d at 736 .

2017Id. at 595 , 521 S.E.2d at 736 .

2017Husband claims that the Howell Court "implicitly concluded that the failure to timely file an equitable distribution claim was not an extraordinary circumstance." The Supreme Court's own language in Howell , though, refutes this argument, as the Court specifically stated that it was reversing this Court "on a narrow ground." Id . at 91, 361 S.E.2d at 588 .

2015Alford v. Shaw, 327 N.C. 526 , 543 n. 6, 398 S.E.2d 445 , 455 n. 6 (1990) ("Once the judgment was vacated, no part of it could thereafter be the law of the case.").

2015Alford v. Shaw, 327 N.C. 526 , 543 n. 6, 398 S.E.2d 445 , 455 n. 6 (1990) ("Once the judgment was vacated, no part of it could thereafter be the law of the case.").

2015Rhew distinguished itself from Wall , however, by noting that " Wall dealt with an equitable distribution award, while the present case involves alimony." Rhew, 178 N.C.App. at 482 , 631 S.E.2d at 865 .

2015Rhew distinguished itself from Wall , however, by noting that " Wall dealt with an equitable distribution award, while the present case involves alimony." Rhew, 178 N.C.App. at 482 , 631 S.E.2d at 865 .

2014The parties had “ample opportunity to present evidence [of the shares’ value] and have failed to do so.” Miller, 97 N.C.