What is the name of your state? IN
OK, this is a matter of a divorce that is getting uglier by the day... Here's the backstory:
My current wife divorced her now ex-husband in December, in DeKalb County, IN. In the divorce decree, it states the following:
Set over to (My wife) as her sole property free and clear of any claim thereto by (Her ex) are the following marital assets as valued by the court: 1997 Grand Caravan and the debt thereon and she shall hold (Her ex) harmless for any payments thereon.
OK, fine pretty self explanatory. The decree also states:
Both parties shall promptly sign and deliver all documents reasonably necessary or appropriate and shall take all other steps reasonably necessary or appropriate to carry out the terms and intent of the court's orders herein.
Here's where the problem begins...
Her ex is listed as the sole owner of the van in question. In no way, shape or form is my wife, or has my wife ever been listed as an owner of this vehicle. Since the court "Set over to (My wife) as her sole property free and clear of any claim thereto by (Her ex)" that would tell me that her ex would have to sign over ownership of the van and her name be listed as the sole owner on the title, since the decree also states that "Both parties shall promptly sign and deliver all documents reasonably necessary or appropriate and shall take all other steps reasonably necessary or appropriate to carry out the terms and intent of the court's orders herein."
Here's where things start to unravel...
The plates for this vehicle expired in June of 2005. My wife, since she was not listed as an owner of the vehicle, was unable to renew the plates (In Indiana, you need the owner's social security number to renew plates). She told her ex this information and even offered to pay for renewing the plates, even though he had violated the divorce decree by refusing to sign the vehicle over in the first place. His response was pretty much "It's not my problem, I'm not doing anything." So, as a result of expired plates, the van was towed. The company that owned the van filed a lawsuit against him for the balance of the loan. His response was "It belongs to my ex wife," even though he never took any of the steps necessary to legally make her the owner, which was ordered by the divorce decree. He responded by filing his own suit against my wife for the amount that the company sued him for.
The problem with him filing a lawsuit against her is this: He filed in DeKalb County. My wife has lived in Allen County for the past 2 1/2 years and filed a motion to change venue, based on the fact that, as I understand it, and I could be wrong, a lawsuit is to be filed in the county nearest the defendant. There was an order on change of venue that states:
The court being duly advised finds the correct venue for this matter is Allen County, Indiana.
We got a letter in the mail from her ex today claiming that it should be heard in DeKalb, since the divorce was in DeKalb. As I understand it, the divorce and the lawsuit are two separate matters. There was no correspondence in the letter from the judge stating what decision was made. I assume that, since we received nothing from the judge in this, that until we DO get something from him, there is no further decision.
My questions are the following: First, Should this case be heard in Allen or DeKalb County? Granted, the divorce took place there, but the van was purchased in Allen County, my wife (the defendant) lives in Allen County and the lawfirm seeking judgement from him is located in Allen County. His claim is that it should be in DeKalb County, since "They (the lawfirm) filed the lawsuit against me in DeKalb County." I would assume that the reason they did this was because any suit is to be filed in the defendant's county, as I stated earlier.
Second, What are the chances that he (my wife's ex) would actually win a judgement like this? Yes, I know that the decree stated that the van was "her property and he is held harmless for any payments thereon," but, the decree also states that "Both parties shall promptly sign and deliver all documents reasonably necessary or appropriate and shall take all other steps reasonably necessary or appropriate to carry out the terms and intent of the court's orders herein." Also, if the vehicle was to be her "sole property," why are they suing him instead of her? Simple... He's still listed as the sole owner. His name, and only his name is listed on the title. Logic would tell me that, since he never took the steps necessary to fufill his end of the decree, she shouldn't be held liable. After all, him not transferring ownership to her made it IMPOSSIBLE for her to get the plates, since she was not the owner.
Any ideas on any of this??
-Bill
OK, this is a matter of a divorce that is getting uglier by the day... Here's the backstory:
My current wife divorced her now ex-husband in December, in DeKalb County, IN. In the divorce decree, it states the following:
Set over to (My wife) as her sole property free and clear of any claim thereto by (Her ex) are the following marital assets as valued by the court: 1997 Grand Caravan and the debt thereon and she shall hold (Her ex) harmless for any payments thereon.
OK, fine pretty self explanatory. The decree also states:
Both parties shall promptly sign and deliver all documents reasonably necessary or appropriate and shall take all other steps reasonably necessary or appropriate to carry out the terms and intent of the court's orders herein.
Here's where the problem begins...
Her ex is listed as the sole owner of the van in question. In no way, shape or form is my wife, or has my wife ever been listed as an owner of this vehicle. Since the court "Set over to (My wife) as her sole property free and clear of any claim thereto by (Her ex)" that would tell me that her ex would have to sign over ownership of the van and her name be listed as the sole owner on the title, since the decree also states that "Both parties shall promptly sign and deliver all documents reasonably necessary or appropriate and shall take all other steps reasonably necessary or appropriate to carry out the terms and intent of the court's orders herein."
Here's where things start to unravel...
The plates for this vehicle expired in June of 2005. My wife, since she was not listed as an owner of the vehicle, was unable to renew the plates (In Indiana, you need the owner's social security number to renew plates). She told her ex this information and even offered to pay for renewing the plates, even though he had violated the divorce decree by refusing to sign the vehicle over in the first place. His response was pretty much "It's not my problem, I'm not doing anything." So, as a result of expired plates, the van was towed. The company that owned the van filed a lawsuit against him for the balance of the loan. His response was "It belongs to my ex wife," even though he never took any of the steps necessary to legally make her the owner, which was ordered by the divorce decree. He responded by filing his own suit against my wife for the amount that the company sued him for.
The problem with him filing a lawsuit against her is this: He filed in DeKalb County. My wife has lived in Allen County for the past 2 1/2 years and filed a motion to change venue, based on the fact that, as I understand it, and I could be wrong, a lawsuit is to be filed in the county nearest the defendant. There was an order on change of venue that states:
The court being duly advised finds the correct venue for this matter is Allen County, Indiana.
We got a letter in the mail from her ex today claiming that it should be heard in DeKalb, since the divorce was in DeKalb. As I understand it, the divorce and the lawsuit are two separate matters. There was no correspondence in the letter from the judge stating what decision was made. I assume that, since we received nothing from the judge in this, that until we DO get something from him, there is no further decision.
My questions are the following: First, Should this case be heard in Allen or DeKalb County? Granted, the divorce took place there, but the van was purchased in Allen County, my wife (the defendant) lives in Allen County and the lawfirm seeking judgement from him is located in Allen County. His claim is that it should be in DeKalb County, since "They (the lawfirm) filed the lawsuit against me in DeKalb County." I would assume that the reason they did this was because any suit is to be filed in the defendant's county, as I stated earlier.
Second, What are the chances that he (my wife's ex) would actually win a judgement like this? Yes, I know that the decree stated that the van was "her property and he is held harmless for any payments thereon," but, the decree also states that "Both parties shall promptly sign and deliver all documents reasonably necessary or appropriate and shall take all other steps reasonably necessary or appropriate to carry out the terms and intent of the court's orders herein." Also, if the vehicle was to be her "sole property," why are they suing him instead of her? Simple... He's still listed as the sole owner. His name, and only his name is listed on the title. Logic would tell me that, since he never took the steps necessary to fufill his end of the decree, she shouldn't be held liable. After all, him not transferring ownership to her made it IMPOSSIBLE for her to get the plates, since she was not the owner.
Any ideas on any of this??
-Bill
