Jacob R. and Jackie L. Bouch - Page 4

                                        - 3 -                                         

               The divorce decree of May 25, 1988, contained no provision             
          relating to custody of the two children, nor any provision for              
          child support.  However, the divorce decree, by reference,                  
          incorporated a marital and property settlement agreement between            
          petitioner and her former spouse.  That agreement provided that             
          petitioner "shall take the minor children as dependents for tax             
          purposes".  The marital and property settlement agreement was not           
          entered into evidence at trial, except for the one page of the              
          agreement relating to the dependency exemption deductions.                  
          During 1999, petitioner's former spouse petitioned the divorce              
          court to compel petitioner (his former wife) to produce certain             
          financial information regarding her income and to decree that               
          petitioner's former spouse was entitled to the dependency                   
          exemption deductions for the two children for tax years 1997 and            
          1998.  The divorce court denied that latter request but granted             
          the request of the former spouse for the production, by                     
          petitioner, of the financial information requested in the motion.           
          Following the production of this information by petitioner the              
          divorce court, by order dated May 16, 2000, concluded that                  
          petitioner's two children had been living with their father since           
          January 1999; that petitioner had not paid or contributed any               
          support for them; that their father (petitioner's former spouse)            
          was their primary custodian; and that, therefore, petitioner's              
          former spouse was entitled to claim the two children as                     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011