<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Divorce &#38; Money &#187; Turner v Rogers- Further Thoughts</title>
	<link>http://www.mddivorcelawyers.com/divorceandmoney</link>
	<description>News and analysis about divorce, child support, alimony, equitable distribution of marital property including pensions and other retirement assets and closely held businesses, post-divorce financial planning, tax issues. life insurance and other divorce-and-money matters in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 14:50:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.0.4" -->

	<item>
		<title>Turner v Rogers- Further Thoughts</title>
		<description><![CDATA[           The Supreme Court struck the right balance in this case. (See yesterday&#8217;s post  summarizing the ruling.) Maryland and D.C already require essentially what the Court said was necessary in this case.  Virginia does not expressly require a showing that the alleged civil contemnor lacks the ability to pay.              The Court was correct to tread very [...]


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.mddivorcelawyers.com/divorceandmoney/child-support/turner-v-rogers-further-thoughts/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Turner v Rogers- Further Thoughts'>Turner v Rogers- Further Thoughts</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<link>http://www.mddivorcelawyers.com/divorceandmoney/child-support/turner-v-rogers-further-thoughts/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
