Geralyn M. Randich - Page 12

                                       - 11 -                                         
               On February 5, 2004, an order with respect to a petition for           
          rule to show cause was entered by the circuit court.2  The order            
          provides, in pertinent part:                                                
                    That this Matter coming on to be heard on the Petition            
               for Rule to Show Cause previously entered against GERALYN M.           
               RANDICH on January 8, 2004, for failure to include                     
               unallocated support on her 2000 tax return as ordered in the           
               judgment for dissolution of marriage; Petitioner [Mr.                  
               Randich] present and represented by counsel and respondent             
               Geralyn M. Randich appearing pro se:                                   
                    The Court finds:                                                  
                    1.  That GERALYN M. RANDICH is found to be in indirect            
               civil contempt for failure to characterize the unallocated             
               support as maintenance on her 2000 Federal and State tax               
               return, as ordered by the Court on April 12, 2000, in the              
               judgment for dissolution of marriage.                                  
                    2.  That GERALYN M. RANDICH shall have the opportunity            
               to purge herself from contempt by filing an appropriate                
               amended Federal and State tax return for 2000 properly                 
               characterizing the payments received in 2000 as maintenance            
               or unallocated support.                                                
                    3.  That sentencing is stayed for 60 days pending the             
               filing of the amended 2000 Federal and State tax returns.              
                                                                                     








          2Ms. Randich objects to this document’s being entered into                  
          evidence on the grounds of relevance, in that the information               
          contained therein is not related to the matter at issue, is                 
          unfair and prejudicial, and promotes confusion of the matter at             
          issue.  A ruling on Ms. Randich’s objection was delayed for                 
          consideration.  This document will be received into evidence                
          subject to Ms. Randich’s objection noted in the record.                     





Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011