Jeanann F. Khalife

Prenuptial and Postnuptial Agreements

Represented Husband, who holds interests in several businesses, investments and properties, in the successful negotiation and finalization of a premarital agreement.

Divorce

Successfully challenged the validity of a transmutation agreement. This is a California Dissolution of Marriage, involving a business that was developed during the marriage. The character of the business and whether it was subject to community property division was at dispute, as opposing party claimed our client executed a valid transmutation agreement. Valid transmutation agreements essentially change the character of an asset, which ultimately affects the division of assets and debts in a dissolution of marriage. We challenged the validity of the transmutation agreement on the basis of form and fraud and won. The court ruled that the transmutation agreement failed to satisfy the statutory form requirements and therefore was invalid. As a result, the business, a community property interest exists in the business, and that interest is subject to division.

Child Custody and Visitation

This matter was a post judgment dispute regarding custody. It specifically involved a change of school which would potentially affect custodial timeshare. We represented the party to challenged the change of school request. Since the child was over the age of 14, we advocated to have the presiding judge to interview the minor child without either party or counsel present (opposing counsel opposed our request and wanted to be present). The Court granted our request, which allowed the child to speak with the Judge without pressure or interference from either party. While the child’s statements were not dispositive they assist our position, and we won. The Court did not grant the change of school request and did not change custody.

Spousal Support and Child Support

The parties had previously negotiated a detailed Stipulated Judgment for Dissolution of Marriage, which included specific provisions regarding spousal support. The provision provided the receiving spouse would be receiving support for a few years, whereby it would terminate. It further provided that the purpose of the provision was to provide her with the time necessary to become gainfully employed in her field of practice. Prior to the termination date, the receiving spouse challenged the provision asking the court to extend the duration of spousal support. We successfully challenged her request and the Court denied the extension. The Court cited that the receiving spouse had ample time to become gainfully employed.

Division of Assets and Liabilities

We represent a party in a dissolution of marriage with Children that primarily involves complex financial issues, including several businesses, properties, misappropriation of community funds, income available for support, and support. We have been able to successfully analyze and address several of these issues.