Cited by

s consistent with “the desirability, where practicable, of granting each spouse complete and immediate control over his or her share of the marital estate in order to ease the transition of the parties after dissolution,” and of interpreting property settlements “so as to avoid 5 future conflicts between [the] parties.” In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 436 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-17 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 436 (2006) (explaining that “a trial court should award a property settlement to be effected immediately where practicable”), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 430 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 437 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 16 (2007); see also Azzi v. Azzi, 118 N.H. 653, 656- 57 (1978) (upholding trial court’s exclusion of purported debt from marital estate where there was evidence upon which trial court could conclude that repayment of debt

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 439 (2006) (explaining that trial court properly relied upon wife’s non-economic contributions as primary homemaker and caretaker for children when fashioning property settlement), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

“We have recognized that a ‘moral’ obligation for repayment cannot properly be characterized as a debt chargeable to the marital estate.” In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 437 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 430 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 430 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 430 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

Alimony should, therefore, generally be “designed to encourage the recipient to establish an independent source of income.” In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 431 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 15-16 (2007).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 436 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 16 (2007).

See, e.g., In the Matter of Hampers & Hampers, 154 N.H. 275, 283-85 [2006); In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 430 (2006), overruled on other grounds by In the Matter of Chamberlin & Chamberlin, 155 N.H. 13, 16 (2007); In the Matter of Sutton & Sutton, 148 N.H. 676, 679 (2002).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 430 (2006).

In the Matter of Harvey & Harvey, 153 N.H. 425, 438 (2006).