Equity Courts Of Equity

Question: Can I take my husband back to court for equity in the house? I have been divorced for 7 years. I live in Al. I was married for 13 yrs. I didn't get anything out of the divorce..Can I take my husband back to court? Equity in the house at the time of divorce? and Back Alimony?

Answer: Get a job and get on with your life

Question: What is the difference between Courts of Law and Courts of Equity>?

Answer: They used to be separate courts but they were merged a long time ago. Some remedies (for example, injunctions) used to be only available in courts of equity, but now all civil courts use equitable principles and remedies in addition to the remedies available at law (damages). There are still some differences, though, for example jury trial is not available for equitable actions.

Question: When do we go to a Common Law court and when to an Equity Court either in the U.K. or in the U.S.A.? I'm Argentinian and need to sit for a very important exam.. we live under the Continental Law so stating some differences between both systems is kind of difficult.. Please don't send me to Wikipedia if you don't know the answer.. I need actual answers from natives.. Thanx

Answer: Before 1898 in the UK Common Law and Equity were seperate bodies of law and were administered in different Courts.A common law court was unable to make a judgment on a case involving equitable law ( for example inheritance).Likewise a Court of Equity could not decide a case involving a contractual dispute. The differences between common law and equity are now only historical and technical.They had differenet origins and developed different concepts and procedures.Contracts were developed under common law.Wills and trusts (fiducae) etc. are concepts from equitable law. Since The Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1898 UK has had a unified Court system.This establish the High Court with a number of seperate Divisions with their own jurisdiction & competences (and also established the Appeals Court system) This meant that technically all courts are divisions of the same 'supreme court' and can hear cases involving either common law or equitable law. However these changes were really only admoinistrative &technical. Although common law and equity and their respective courts were merged into one Supreme Court each part of our High Court system still has its own particular jurisdiction/competence.See http://july.fixedreference.org/en/20040724/wikipedia/High_Court_of_Justice_of_England_and_Wales Cases involving equity are today heard in the Chancery Division. http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/chancery.htm

Question: how do new owners of a foreclosed home, Master in Equity court, sheriff, etc. handle insurance issues? how do new owners of a foreclosed home, Master in Equity court, sheriff, etc. handle insurance issues? I am wanting to buy a foreclosed on home. There may be a time frame between the time the deed is in my name and the time the occupant leaves, either voluntarily or by force. I am not seeing how and why the "system" would let the new owner risk losing the house they just bought, to fire by vandalism. I'm hoping there is something I'm missing here. I contacted 3 insurance companies and none offer insurance between the time I get the deed in my name to the time the occupant moves out. The deed would be transferred in 2-3 days. I've been told that by the court. The new owner needs to put insurance on it, and you can do it in advance, for the ESTIMATED closing date. ...........HOW.......?????????? I am not finding an insurance company to cover the house from the time the deed is in my name to the time the previous owner is out. If you buy a house with a tenant still in it, then you're the landlord. ..........this would not be a landlord tenant situation. They are not a "tenant". ..........I've talk to the sheriff's office and a normal eviction of a tenant thru the magistrate takes no more than 40 days. This eviction is different and a sheriff's officer told me YES, I could ask the power company to turn the power off to hasten the move out. I could hire someone if needed to be a security guard until they are out. Fire is my concern. I'll ask neighbors to alert me of any odd noises, hammer, etc. update: I found an agent going through Johnson & Johnson 2 insure the property for $40K. If a total loss, they'd write me, or me & my bank a check for $40K. This home would cost me $38500 to buy. I told them I would not be the landlord, the occupant would not be a tenant, and house would not be a rental. It would be a previous owner who might refuse to move out and me, the new owner, who might have to evict. Their coverage would start the day the deed is in my name and continue until the occupant is out. The bank should keep their (house-asset) insured until they get their money from me or my bank. Premium $500 a year 4 this "occupant" coverage. I hope the agent is not mistaken. I'm going 2 check if the bank can keep it insured until it is vacant, even if I have 2 pickup the cost of the policy after deed is in my name. And whether they can evict. I guess they haven't evicted up until now as the deed stayed in the estate's name until foreclosure auction had already been schedulled.

Answer: You can't insure the home until it's yours. Insurance requires an interest in what's being insured - so if you don't close until the 5th you can't insure it on the 1st - there is no insurable interest. If the home were damaged in that time frame you generally wouldn't be obligated to pay for the home. Once you've taken legal ownership then you can insure it - but if the other people are still living in it that can cause other issues with the insurance since the home is not occupied by the owner. And, if the people living there did destroy it while you had it insured, your company may or may not pay for it - but the papers are signed and you're the owner so the bank could still force you to pay for the home. Personally, I'd avoid this situation. If you're going to buy foreclosed, buy one that's unoccupied. Dealing with evictions after the fact and everything else is just too complicated and risky. Why hasn't the bank already evicted them? That should be their job, not yours after you buy the home.

Question: Lee is a judge in a court of equity. In this court, Lee may bar a suit if it is not filed within a proper time? Lee is a judge in a court of equity. In this court, Lee may bar a suit if it is not filed within a proper time under the doctrine known as a.stare decisis. b.laches. c.the king's conscience. d.the chancellor's discretion

Answer: b. laches didn't realize you were just doing your homework :)

Question: Why do lawyers still use the term "court of equity"?

Answer: Two reasons. First, in some states, there still is a distinction between courts of law and courts of equity. Delaware is an example. Delaware has a separate Court of Chancery that decides all equitable issues. Similarly, federal bankruptcy courts have consistently been described as courts of equity. Second, there are historical reasons for the term "court of equity" that retain some validity. Principles of law and equity are still different, even after the merger of law and equity in most jurisdictions. For example, in most jurisdictions (and under the U.S. Constitution), there is no right to jury trial in equitable actions, or as to equitable issues in actions that raise both legal and equitable issues. Also, some equitable doctrines only apply in equity and not law, e.g., laches and unclean hands. Therefore, you can only make these arguments with respect to equitable issues.

Question: Court of equity? What is the difference between a normal court and a court of equity? Please provide examples. Thanks!

Answer: In the modern era there really is no difference. We no longer maintain separate courts of law and equity. But traditionally, certain courts had the power to award money damages (law) and other courts had the power to issue injunctions, demand specific performance of a contract, force the transfer of land, and other non-money awards (equity). Today, the main difference is that a different set of maxims apply to actions in law and equity. But the same courts sit both ways. This is a relic of medieval English common law, but like many things in the common law we continue to do it even though it makes no sense.

Question: Auto Accidents in different states can be challenged in which courts? Please read more!? While driving his car in Virginia, Carpe Diem, a resident of North Carolina, struck Butt, a resident of Alaska. As a result of the accident, Butt suffered more than $60,000 in medical expenses. Butt would like to know, if he personally serves the proper papers to Diem, whether he can obtain jurisdiction against Diem for damages in the following courts: A) Alaska State trial court B) Federal Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (includes Alaska) C) Virginia State trial court D) Virginia Federal district court E) Federal Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (includes Virginia and North Carolina) F) Virginia equity court G) North Carolina State trial court Please help and explain. I am very confused.

Answer: Welcome to homework night here on Law & Ethics :) Okay. You can get personal jurisdiction over someone because of where they live, or the connection they have to a state. So you definitely need one of those two things to get jurisdiction (jdx) in that state. Generally accidents are tried in state courts, but because the accident was between residents of two states (diversity) you can sue in federal court... but only in a state where you have also have personal jurisdiction (pdx). So let's see about the choices here. A) No pdx here because the plaintiff lives here, not the defendant (D). B) No, the 9th circuit isn't a trial court. It's an appellate court. C) Yes, because the lawsuit arose out of D's acts in the state and D) Yes, same reason, you can go to federal court because of diversity jdx. E) No, appeals courts still aren't trial courts. F) No, an equity court doesn't handle claims for damages. G) Yes, because D lives in North Carolina. If any of that isn't clear let me know and I'll try to elaborate.

Question: True or False?( I have exam)? Is Equity courts are the birthplace of the right to a jury trail.

Answer: Equity Courts is included in this amendment: Amendment VII: trial by jury. The right to jury trial is relatively secure at present; as noted above, most of the controversies concerning to whom we must extend the rights of the accused have been rooted in Amendment VI instead. That said, perhaps we should exercise greater vigilance when the right to jury trial is blunted in the name of expediency – whether in the service of so-called tort reform or in the course of seemingly-progressive guidelines that steer disputes into arbitration instead of the courts.

Question: My ex got a Court order giving him 50% of the equity in our jointly owned home to be paid to? him when our son reaches the age of 18, which will be in 3 months. My ex has made it clear that he expects me to sell the house so that he can be paid. I have another child aged 6 (Not by my ex). My share of the equity has several charges on it which will have to be paid when the house is sold, leaving me with no hope of buying another property. What would happen if I simply refused to sell the house, or refused to allow potential purchasers to enter the property? In the UK.

Answer: The courts could force the sale and could also hold you in contempt of court.

Question: Does equity principals apply here? I took $70 000 loan on the house after separation. The court gave my ex exclusive use of the house as a compensation. As of today she made $86 800 on the house rent. Should I bring equities laws to attention of the court and ask that she give me half of that difference to comply with fair share understanding? Or is it up to judge to decide what is fair even if it is not 50/50? We have shared equal custody of the children.

Answer: i don't know if it is worth it. something similar happened to my parents. my dad got a home that was already paid off and made like $85K on the sell of the home, when the home was only appraised for $40K.

Question: Can a boyfriend sue his girlfriend for equity in HER house? My boyfriend of 13 years is threatening to take me to court for money. I own my own home, and have used my money to fix it up. He only payed a small portion of the bills. Can he sue me for damages when we break up? We live in Indiana.

Answer: He can sue, but he isn't likely to win. He probably thinks that you have a "comon law" marriage - many people still beleive that if you are with someone for a certain amount of time, it amounts to a marriage. That simply isn't true. Additionally, as someone mentioned earlier, unless his name is on the lein or the mortgage, he doesn't have a chance. You would do well to tell him you are going to countersue for 13 years of rent.

Question: When a solicitor is working a personnal injury claim, can a claim for loss of equity be made seperately- by me Equity is the wrong word! I actually lost money selling my brand new car after someone had crashed int the back of it. The claim has been accepted (other party admits liability) but I have lost a minimum of £1600 because I am offered the 'LOWER CAP PRICE' as my car has sustained damage in a crash. Can I legally take up private proceedings against the other's insurers for my loss - WITHOUT interference of the personnal injury claim I have a solicitor already working on? My solicitor tells me that the personnal injury claim HAS to be dealt with before I can fight the loss of anything else( I'm unsure). He also tells me that by taking this other issue to the small claims courts on my own would actually make the personnal injury claim invalid and all his work up o now would be worthless. In this day and age I find it hard to trust anyone and feel that I ought to just tear the insurance up and drive without it - I need honesty AND corroboration it- can you corroborate things? If a car has been crashed into and repaired- the repairwork cannot be done to an exact match of the original car (close but not exact). When a car is bought by a dealer that sold you the original, they offer what is called 'A CAP PRICE' there is a lower cap price and a higher cap price. If the car has been involved in a crash you will be offered the lower cap price. When an MPV has suffered 33hrs of work to repair it then I'd say even I would be sceptical of buying it to use for other things than carrying children. The actual impact was around 30mph as the young fool that hit the back was doing around 50mph when he braked - maybe 8 feet from my vehicle. my question needs repeating as it hasn't been answered; Is there a point of law that states I cannot deal with the loss on the car seperately to the personnal injury claim? Would it actually make the personnal injury claim invalid?

Answer: You are in a tearing hurry to do everything at once, but why not listen to the advice of your solicitor and do as he says before rushing to the small claims court? You don't say what your personal injuries are, but most of those cases are settled out of court and you have six years from the time of the accident to bring the other action. From your threat to drive without insurance, I gather that you are still capable of doing so, for which I am glad. Get your money for the personal injuries and then see about pursuing the other insurance company for the loss you have suffered. Your solicitor will advise you about whether you should sign anything "in full and final settlement".

Question: What training empowers a Judge or Justice to make laws? In order to make a comment about the above question and answer, I need some helpful comments I could think about. I would really like to inform myself better on issues referring to the training that lead up to someone having the authority to contribute to or make a law. Most books waffle on about issues that are usually better understood by someone with legal knowledge, but for my purposes, I would really appreciate some feedback in ordinary or simple words (if that is possible). Also, I keep looking up the word "equity" but am still confused when I come across the following: "court of law v. court of equity". Is there any way I can draw an association that will enable me to understand this better?

Answer: Law is not created by judges. It is created by legislature. Judges interpret the laws, and make decisions based on these interpretations, but the politicians we elect into office are the ones who create it.

Question: probate fraud florida legal courts? Unethical lawyers should not be paid to pervert, corrupt, and abuse the legal system Equity demands an impartial court and doesn’t stand a chance when there is bias, prejudice, and likely corruption. The most important criteria for civilized society is the rule of law.

Answer: we just need some lawyers with some character, that's all, ha

Question: who will give me a loan with low credit scores and not much equity in my home so i don't get a judgement ? A lender we are currently with wants payment in full for a loan that was to be repaid in 5 years and isn't even 3 years yet. We missed a couple of payments when I lost my job 2 years ago and they turned us over to a law firm. Our houes payment went up $900 within 4 months last year and the job I had was $4.00/hr less then the one before. Jan. 10,2007 I lost my job and now this lender wants their money because the payment was returned because I received my check late and is not useable right away. If we don't pay the loan they are taking us to court and my husband's check will be garnished and we will have a judgement on our record and I will have a hard time finding a job because the last employer did a credit check and most of them seem to be doing taht now. We first had until Jan.31 to pay but the financing fell through and they want the money now or they will begin filing court proceedings. I'm desparate for help. Nobody in our family is able to help.

Answer: I'm getting a divorce....when you get the answer to this let me know!!!! I am in the same boat with low (fair) credit score and not much equity in my home. I also do not have family to help me. I have to get my husband's name of the loan note for our home.

Question: equity in house about to go to court for sale or repossession? this is a tricky 1 , i bought a house 10 yrs ago and let it go to voluntary repossession, it sold , i buried my head in the sand moved on married and got a mortgage with my husband , now the trustee in ancruptcy has put a charge on our home and are trying to reposess , they say they want my share of equity in the house which totals approx 15,000 , how does my husband raise the money when there is a charge on the house , does this affect his credit rating , would a judge really repossess even though they want 15 grand my home is valued at 100 grand , it goes to court very soon , i am ill with worry

Answer: It may not be what you want to hear but your creditors are entitled to be paid and you have the means to pay them Just bad luck that your assets are in property rather than cash. It can't affect your husbands credit rating because he is not being pursued. Either you or your husband has to try to remortgage to get the cash, or alternatively sell the house, repay what you owe and downsize.

Question: My ex husband violated a court order to pay me half the equity from our home. Can I get my home back? In mediation my ex and I agreed i would vacate our home, he would move back in and pay me half the equity by 12/31/09. I moved out, he and his new girlfriend (who is helping him pay the mortgage) moved in. I have only received a few payments, no where near the entire amount. I am going through financial hardship and am taking him to court, tomorrow morning. Can I ask for my home back without paying him a dime since he defaulted or since he hasnt paid and is receiving help on the the mortgage payment and i am still on the loan, am i entitled to half of the rent his new girlfriend is paying? Am i being unrealistic to ask for this? I have a feeling he couldnt qualify for a new loan without me and my income. I am still part owner, no Quick Claim Deed was signed. What should I expect tomorrow? Help, I dont want to look like an idiot.

Answer: You could ask the court to put the home up for sale but you will have to pay him his money back from the sale of the home . What I see is a spouse looking to make her husband pay for a bad marrage and I ask you would you want someone looking to make your life unpleasant if all you wanted was out . No court will go along with your demands they however will sell it all off so the two of you can go your own way. If you keep up on this journey to make your ex life bad I could tell you you will get some papers from a court called court order to stay away

Question: Sell house to family member during divorce? Hi, I am the sole title/deed/mortgage holder on our home. My husband filed for divorce. Can I "sell" the house to my son for the amount remaining on my mortgage thereby getting no profit and avoiding paying my husband any equity profits? Court has ordered sale of house due to utility/insurance delinquencies. (if that wasn't clear I'll do my best to muddle some more. assume the mortgage was for $300,000. I have paid $250,000. If I sell the house to my son for $50,000, the mortgage zeros out. If the house appraises below $300,000, we're clear...if it appraises over $300,000, I imagine I would owe my husband half of whatever that difference would be otherwise I'm in contempt for selling the house for less than it's worth...?) Have been looking for info on this...I live in an equitable division state. Thank you SO much for your help. Thanks for so many quick replies. I suppose the best bet is to take what I can get and run. My lawyer has been helping me with other issues - we haven't talked much about the house but it looks like nobody has any loop holes.

Answer: You cannot sell a property has potential claim to without their consent. If you try, they have the right to sue you. Doing so in the middle of a divorce is just stupid. And slimy. Whether your husband as a claim on the house or not depends on your state. In Texas, where I lived until recently, a spouse had a claim on any property that was their "homestead," whether they were on on the title/mortgage or not. Meaning, if the owning spouse sold the property without the other partner's consent, the other partner could come back and say that they had a claim... which could gum up the sale, or even cause the new owner's problems regardless of if they had closed the purchase. You really need to talk to your lawyer. The court generally looks down on slimy dealings to screw the one partner or the other out of assets that are legally theirs.

Question: Lender trying to reposess due to arrears no equity in house going bankrupt any way i can keep house? Mental and physical collapse after separation from my partner got behind with mortgage. did an iva. Situation now, in arrears with mortgage. No equity in property. I really want to keep house for partner to one day come back to. Seems Bankruptcy only option. Doctor has said I am not at the moment mentally capable of dealing with anything so court official will be appointed. (No relatives or anyone else) After a year off work, now claiming benefits but dont think will be enough to cover mortgage interest. Lender will not consider any options. anyone know of any way I can keep the house, at least in the short term?

Answer: Hello Sorry to hear of your problems. Check with DWP you should qualify for interest payments on mortgage - that might pacify the Lender for a short time. I would advise you contact national debtline it is a FREE service. Hope they can help - details follow FREEPHONE: 0808 808 4000 Monday to Friday 9am to 9pm Saturday 9.30am to 1pm 24-hour voicemail. Please leave a message to request an information pack or factsheet. FAX: 0121 410 6230 POSTAL ADDRESS: National Debtline Tricorn House, 51-53 Hagley Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham B16 8TP Really hope you sort something out