That said, California is a community property state, which means that income and debts that are incurred during the marriage are considered the joint property of both spouses. Again though, Holmes debt and her husband's wealth were acquired before their marriage, so in that case it's easy to keep these separate.
Is only being incurred now, at the verdict.
> husband's wealth
Acquired before marriage, and would have to have been mind bogglingly stupid, knowing the risk of a liability finding, not to protect that with a prenuptial.
IANAL but that's generally not how it works. The timing of when the debt was incurred here would be considered when the conduct occurred that resulted in the verdict.
> not to protect that with a prenuptial
Would probably want a prenup for other reasons, but wouldn't be necessary here. Just need to ensure his pre-marriage assets weren't commingled with community property during the marriage.
Also, I can't imagine his family would have jumped for joy over it either without consulting several lawyers ahead of time.
I guarantee there's a prenup.
When you marry someone you become some sort of combined entity where assets/liabilities now belong to the husband-and-wife-estate figure and not by any of them individually (obv. disregarding the effects of prenups and similar clauses).
"Title III also protects individuals by limiting the amount of earnings that may be garnished in any workweek or pay period to the lesser of 25 percent of disposable earnings or the amount by which disposable earnings are greater than 30 times the Federal minimum hourly wage prescribed by Section 6(a) (1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. This limit applies regardless of how many garnishment orders an employer receives. The Federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour."
It also states that if state limits are smaller than the state limits apply.
A bankruptcy judge later transferred the rights from the publisher to the Goldman family. Why I have no idea. But it isn't like it was "taken" from Mr. Simpson or he "had to give" the proceeds. He got his money from the publisher and later a bankruptcy judge decided the publisher could be parted with their income stream.
Obviously you can, if you negotiate it with the ghostwriter - who would just be your employee anyway or even be a team of writers, so all the copyrights can remain with you - same way Marvel has the copyright for stuff people wrote for them.
Rather than the obvious "here sign this form that says we can publish a book about this and put your name on it"?
>Florida has one of the most generous homestead exemptions found in any state. Under the Florida exemption system, homeowners may exempt an unlimited amount of value in their home or other property covered by the homestead exemption. However, the property cannot be larger than half an acre in a municipality or 160 acres elsewhere.
Texas has one similar:
>You can protect an unlimited amount of equity in your principal residence. It applies to properties on 10 acres or less in a city, town, or village or 100 acres or less in the country (families can double this to 200 acres).
If you are "high value" and potentially at risk of a lawsuit, it is worth considering relocating to a state with favorable bankruptcy laws.
But what happens to her in that case? If the court does sign off on a restitution penalty, is it the equivalent of a creditor's judgment against her? I believe acts of fraud can't be discharged in bankruptcy, so is this judgment something that would hang over her forever? Could the defrauded parties garnish her wages?
Just curious as to how the logistics of "unpayable restitution penalties" play out in the real world.