-14-
With regard to the third factor, the payments were fixed in
amount and were not subject to contingencies. This factor favors
treating the payments as part of a property settlement.
With regard to the fourth factor, although the total amount of
the installment payments was not secured, in the event of Dr.
Ibach's early death, petitioner was entitled either to have a claim
against his estate or receive proceeds of his life insurance. This
factor favors treating the payments as part of a property
settlement.
With regard to the fifth factor, at the time petitioner and
Dr. Ibach divorced, their net assets were valued at approximately
$1 million. Petitioner received $150,000 pursuant to Paragraph 9a,
the Forest Point Court house valued at $173,000, and a car valued
at $5,000. Moreover, petitioner was relieved of loan obligations
totaling at least $120,000 as well as her obligations to educate
her children. The $448,000 total petitioner received is exclusive
of the Paragraph 7 payments. Thus, the amount of the Paragraph 7
payments plus the other property awarded to petitioner exceeded
one-half of the property accumulated by petitioner and Dr. Ibach
during their marriage. This factor favors treating the payments as
alimony.
With regard to the sixth factor, petitioner was financially
dependent upon Dr. Ibach for 24 years. Petitioner and Dr. Ibach
submitted separate financial affidavits to the divorce court.
There appears to be a correlation between the amount of monthly
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011