I was looking through a court transcript, and saw that an attorney had to remind the judge that the house/home was actually titled in the husband's name, and was purchased when he was single (i.e. separate property); it was not jointly purchased, as most marital homes are.
This was clearly stated in the current (and prior) motions in that case.
This distinction was crucial to the husband's case, as the case revolved around not losing the house in the divorce (3-year marriage).
Why does a judge have to be reminded about these things that are fundamental to a case that are already stated in a filed motion?
There appear to be many cases the judge has to deal with daily, and so, do these oversights(?) happen often?
This was clearly stated in the current (and prior) motions in that case.
This distinction was crucial to the husband's case, as the case revolved around not losing the house in the divorce (3-year marriage).
Why does a judge have to be reminded about these things that are fundamental to a case that are already stated in a filed motion?
There appear to be many cases the judge has to deal with daily, and so, do these oversights(?) happen often?