Mrozek v. Mrozek
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
We first consider whether the trial court erred in finding that the marital debt owed to defendant’s parents had no value as of the date of separation because it was not legally enforceable because of the running of the statute of limitations period with no payments and no acknowledgment of the debt. In an equitable distribution action “the trial court is required to classify, value and distribute, if marital, the debts of the parties to the marriage.” Miller v. Miller, 97 N.C. App. 77, 79, 387 S.E.2d 181, 183 (1990) (citing Byrd v. Owens, 86 N.C. App. 418, 424, 358 S.E.2d 102,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- White v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Application of Campsites Unlimited, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Miller v. TaltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
- Lawing v. LawingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Allen v. AllenCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cooper v. CooperCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- State v. LeachCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
- Mrozek v. MrozekCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- Shae Kevin Graham v. Sharea FosterMichigan Supreme Court · 2017
- Shae Kevin Graham v. Sharea FosterMichigan Supreme Court · 2017