Fathers United Women's Legal Clinic Oct 12 2017

website http://fathersunitedwome nscoalition.com/ Call 703 971 2379 for information. Text 571 214 2432 Meeting announcements 703 347 6518 Fathers United and Women's Coalition 7 pm Room 265 Meeting this Thursday, Oct 12, 2017, at Messiah United Methodist Church, 6215 Rolling Rd Springfield VA22152 Stephen Hoffman will be moderating. MY EMAIL stephenhoffman2000@yahoo .com The lawyer will be John Bauserman fathers United for Equal Rights and Women's Coalition of VA and DC will hold its regular meeting on Thursday in Springfield. Encourage friends to attend who have domestic relations issues.Make 5 calls or emails or text, please!! We want members to attend even if they have no immediate problem so that they can help others. It is very helpful to have old-timers present. The lawyer is scheduled to arrive at 8:00 pm and stays until about 9:30 pm depending on the number of questions. Bring any legal papers including motions, orders, and agreements. If you have specific questions now, you may send them by e-mail. The lawyer may be able to bring material, which is on point. COST: Dues are $45/year for the first year payable at $15/meeting until dues are paid in full. At the present time renewal is only $30/year if membership is continuous

VA SUPREME COURT decision on equitable distribution

122145 David v. David 02/27/2014 In a marital dispute under Virginia’s equitable distribution and marital property statutes, the Court of Appeals erred in interpreting Code § 20-107.3(A)(3)(a) as placing an initial burden upon the non-owning spouse, who seeks to establish that an appreciation in the value of separate property occurring during marriage is marital property, of proving that significant personal effort during marriage or a contribution of marital property proximately caused such appreciation. This statute provides that the non-owning spouse has the burden of proving that contributions of marital property or personal effort were made and that the separate property increased in value, and the statute provides that – once this burden of proof is met – the owning spouse has the burden of proving that the increase in value or some portion thereof was not caused by such contributions of marital property or personal effort. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and this case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.