• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
MacElree Harvey, Ltd.

MacElree Harvey, Ltd.

Initiative in Practice

  • Home
  • Legal Services
        • Banking & Finance Law
        • Business & Corporate Law
        • Criminal Defense
        • Employment Law
        • Estates & Trusts Law
        • Family Law
        • Litigation Law
        • Mediation and Arbitration
        • Personal Injury Law
        • Real Estate & Land Use Law
        • Tax Law
  • Our Team
        • Joseph A. Bellinghieri
        • Patrick J. Boyer
        • Jeffrey P. Burke
        • Robert A. Burke
        • Matthew C. Cooper
        • John C. Cronin
        • Daniel T. Crossland
        • Marie I. Crossley
        • Harry J. DiDonato
        • Jaycie DiNardo
        • Caroline G. Donato
        • Nicholas S. Eisel
        • Sally A. Farrell
        • Brian J. Forgue
        • William J. Gallagher
        • Patrick J. Gallo, Jr.
        • Mary Kay Gaver
        • J. Charles Gerbron, Jr.
        • Leo M. Gibbons
        • Joseph P. Green, Jr.
        • Carolina Heinle
        • Court Heinle
        • Frank W. Hosking III
        • Katherine A. Isard
        • J. Kurtis Kline
        • Peter E. Kratsa
        • Mary E. Lawrence
        • Daniel R. Losco
        • Michael G. Louis
        • Jamison C. MacMain
        • John F. McKenna
        • Matthew M. McKeon
        • Brian L. Nagle
        • Lance J. Nelson
        • Timothy F. Rayne
        • Michael C. Rovito
        • Duke Schneider
        • Andrew R. Silverman
        • Ashley B. Stitzer
        • Coleman O. Thomas
        • Natalie R. Young
  • About Us
    • Our History
    • Our Approach
    • Social Responsibility
    • Testimonials
  • Careers
  • News & Updates
    • Articles by Our Attorneys
    • News
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
    • Newsletters
  • Offices
    • Centreville, DE
    • Hockessin, DE
    • Kennett Square, PA
    • West Chester, PA
  • Contact
  • (610) 436-0100

Articles by Our Attorneys

How are Retirement Assets Divided in Divorce?

July 23, 2025 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

In a divorce case, retirement assets are subject to equitable division based upon enumerated statutory factors. Equitable distribution does not always mean equal division. For example, certain factors require the Court to consider current incomes, future earning capacities, and other financial circumstances. Often, the lower-earning spouse receives a majority of the marital assets, including retirement accounts and pensions.

Marital assets comprise property acquired during the marriage, absent certain exceptions. The growth of a non-marital asset remains non-marital property. Often, marital property is commingled or mixed, meaning it has both marital and non-marital components. This non-marital component not only includes the date-of-marriage balance on the retirement account but also any passive gains that can be proven to have been generated from the pre-marital balance. Establishing this passive gain often requires the assistance of a divorce financial expert or accountant.

Retirement assets with ascertainable balances, such as 401(k) plans, IRAs, and other defined contribution accounts, are often netted together and subjected to one percentage division. By way of illustration, if a husband has $150,000 in his 401(k) and a wife has $50,000 in her 401(k), and the percentage split is 50/50, the husband will owe the wife $50,000 via a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to effectuate the division of retirement funds. The division of such retirement accounts is also subject to market gains and losses.

Pensions, which often do not have ascertainable present values because they are based in part on future events such as future compensation and years of service, are divided pursuant to a coverture fraction referred to as the Cooper Formula with a 50% multiplier. The Cooper Formula takes the number of years worked toward the pension during the marriage as the numerator and uses the total number of years worked toward the pension as the denominator. That fraction is then subjected to a 50% multiplier, which is the award given to the non-employee spouse. For example:

10 years worked during the marriage x 50% = award to non-employee spouse
20 years total worked

Thus, in the illustration above, if the total pension benefit upon reaching pay status was $4,000 per month, the non-employee spouse would receive $1,000 per month, with the employee spouse retaining $3,000.

To learn more about this topic or for personalized guidance, contact attorney Patrick Boyer, who focuses on family law matters including divorce, equitable distribution, and retirement asset division. Patrick provides clients with strategic advice and compassionate support during challenging transitions. Call 302-654-4454 or visit macelree.com/contact-us.

Filed Under: Articles by Our Attorneys Tagged With: Patrick J. Boyer

The Necessity of Special Needs Trusts

July 1, 2025 by Jamison MacMain Leave a Comment

Planning for the future of a loved one with a disability can be emotionally and legally complex. For families navigating government benefits like Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid, even a well-meaning financial gift or inheritance can unintentionally jeopardize access to critical support. One powerful tool to protect both benefits and quality of life is the Special Needs Trust (SNT). This article explores what Special Needs Trusts are, how they work, and why they are an essential part of long-term planning for individuals with disabilities. 

The Necessity of Special Needs Trusts 

Consider the case of a young woman, Jane, who has a developmental disability. Jane’s mother has died and left an inheritance for Jane. Without a Special Needs Trust, nearly any level of inheritance would likely disqualify Jane from receiving Medicaid and SSI, leading to a loss of essential services and support. Instead of receiving these governmental support services, Jane’s inheritance, which she likely will have a challenge managing herself, will need to be used to pay for the same services that she already was receiving. Additionally, when that inheritance is used up, Jane will have to go through all of the long and invasive steps that she had already gone through, to get back to receiving governmental support.  

However, Jane’s mother, by executing the proper documents before her death to direct that Jane’s inheritance go into an SNT, the Jane can continue to receive government benefits while using the trust funds for additional needs, such as specialized therapies, adaptive equipment, education, housing, etc. 

Definition and Purpose of Special Needs Trusts 

A Special Needs Trust (SNT) is a legal document for the benefit of individuals with disabilities, used to manage and protect assets. The primary purpose of an SNT is to ensure that individuals with special needs can maintain their eligibility for government benefits, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid, while also having access to additional resources that can enhance their quality of life. 

Benefits of Establishing a Special Needs Trust 

Establishing a Special Needs Trust offers numerous benefits individuals with disabilities.  

  1. It provides financial security by safeguarding assets that can be used for the beneficiary’s supplemental needs, such as medical care, education, and recreational activities. 
  1. It allows family members and other benefactors to contribute to the trust without jeopardizing the beneficiary’s eligibility for essential government programs.  
  1. Lastly, an SNT can be tailored to meet the specific needs and circumstances of the beneficiary, offering flexibility and peace of mind to families. 

How Special Needs Trusts Protect Eligibility for Government Benefits 

One of the critical functions of a Special Needs Trust is to protect the beneficiary’s eligibility for government benefits. By placing assets in an SNT, these resources are not considered when determining eligibility for means-tested programs like SSI and Medicaid. This protection ensures that the beneficiary can continue to receive vital support from these programs while also benefiting from the trust’s resources for additional needs. 

Key Considerations When Setting Up a Special Needs Trust 

When setting up a Special Needs Trust, several key considerations must be taken into account. It is essential to choose a knowledgeable trustee who understands the complexities of managing an SNT and the beneficiary’s unique needs. Additionally, the trust must be carefully drafted to comply with federal and state regulations to ensure it effectively protects the beneficiary’s eligibility for government benefits. Consulting with an attorney experienced in special needs planning is crucial to navigate these legal intricacies. 

Legal and Financial Implications of Special Needs Trusts 

The establishment of a Special Needs Trust carries significant legal and financial implications. Legally, the trust must be structured to comply with applicable laws to ensure its validity and effectiveness. Financially, the trust must be managed prudently to meet the beneficiary’s needs over their lifetime. This requires careful investment strategies and regular reviews to adapt to changing circumstances. Engaging professionals with expertise in trust management and special needs planning is essential to address these implications effectively. 

Conclusion 

Special Needs Trusts are a vital tool in planning for the future of individuals with disabilities. They offer a means to provide financial security and enhance the quality of life for beneficiaries while preserving their eligibility for essential government benefits. Proper planning and the establishment of an SNT can alleviate the financial and emotional burdens on families, ensuring that individuals with special needs receive the support and resources they require. As such, it is imperative for families to consider the benefits of Special Needs Trusts and seek professional guidance to implement this crucial aspect of special needs planning. 

Jamison C. MacMain is part of MacElree Harvey’s Estate Planning Department, where he advises clients on wills, trusts, guardianships, and long-term planning strategies. He is passionate about helping families make informed, proactive decisions that safeguard both assets and quality of life for loved ones with disabilities. To learn more or schedule a consultation, please contact Jamison at [email protected]. 

Filed Under: Articles by Our Attorneys Tagged With: Jamison C. MacMain, Jamison MacMain

Can You Get Divorced If Your Spouse Refuses to Sign?

June 20, 2025 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

It is possible to resolve almost any issue that arises during a divorce through an agreement between spouses. However, if couples were able to cooperate easily, they likely wouldn’t be seeking a divorce in the first place. While a spouse’s refusal to cooperate or refusal to sign divorce papers can delay the process, it cannot stop a divorce from proceeding in Delaware Family Court.

What Happens If Your Spouse Won’t Sign the Divorce Papers?

The first obstacle in an uncontested divorce becomes a contested divorce when one spouse refuses to sign. The process starts with serving the Petition for Divorce. If the other spouse does not voluntarily accept service, a process server will attempt to personally deliver the Petition. If those efforts fail, service by publication—usually on the Delaware Family Court’s website—is an option to move the case forward.

Can the Divorce Proceed Without Their Consent?

Yes. Once proper service is completed, the divorce case may proceed, and a Decree of Divorce can be granted even over a spouse’s objections. Under Delaware divorce law, spouses must be separated for six months and the marriage must be considered an irretrievable breakdown. Separation can occur even if both parties live in the same household—as long as they occupy separate bedrooms and no longer maintain a sexual relationship.

What If Your Spouse Ignores the Divorce Process?

After the Decree of Divorce is entered, the court will address any outstanding issues, including property division, alimony, and other economic relief, regardless of one party’s refusal to participate. If a spouse continues to be non-cooperative, the Family Court may impose legal consequences, including:

  • Sanctions
  • Awards of attorney’s fees
  • Adverse inferences
  • Default judgments

Bottom Line: You Can Still Get Divorced

In short, ignoring a divorce petition does not prevent the divorce from happening. If your spouse refuses to sign or participate, you still have legal options to move forward with the help of an experienced divorce attorney in Delaware.

Contact Patrick J. Boyer
Family Law Attorney | MacElree Harvey
Direct: 302‑504‑7294

Filed Under: Articles by Our Attorneys Tagged With: Patrick Boyer, Patrick J. Boyer

When Can You Modify a Custody Order?

June 12, 2025 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

A parent’s ability to modify a custody order in Delaware depends upon the nature of the modification request, whether the prior custody order was entered by a Judge after a hearing on the merits, and the length of time that has passed between the entry of the prior order and the modification request.

Delaware distinguishes between “custody” and “visitation” under its family law statutes. Legal custody refers to the ability to make important decisions on the child’s behalf, while residency refers to where the child primarily lives. If the child lives primarily with one parent, that parent has primary residential custody. If the parenting time is equally or nearly equally shared, it is referred to as shared residency. The contact a non-custodial parent has with the child—including holidays, exchange times, and vacations—is considered visitation.

Requests to modify visitation in Delaware are always evaluated under the best interests of the child standard, as set forth in 13 Del. C. § 722. A custody order by agreement of the parents may also be modified using the same best interests standard. However, it’s important to note that even when this standard applies, parental agreements carry legal weight. Some Family Court Judges will not consider events that occurred prior to the original agreement, and any request for a modification may raise the question of why the existing parenting agreement no longer works.

If a Judge entered a custody order after a full hearing, a parent may not seek to modify the custody provisions of that order for two years, unless they can prove that continuing the current arrangement would jeopardize the child’s physical health or significantly impair the child’s emotional development. This is a high legal standard that is difficult to meet. After the two-year mark, the threshold for modification is lower and again centers around the child’s best interests.

Author Patrick J. Boyer concentrates his practice on family law. He advocates in various areas including, but not limited to, divorce, property division, alimony, child custody and visitation, child support, and domestic violence. In addition, Patrick assists his clients with issues involving guardianship and third-party visitation. He is licensed in Delaware and Pennsylvania and works out of the firm’s Centreville, Delaware office.

Filed Under: Articles by Our Attorneys Tagged With: Patrick J. Boyer

Employment Law Update May 2025

May 30, 2025 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

In May, a local school district gets hit with an Equal Pay Act jury verdict, and federal judges strike down actions from the previous and current presidential administrations as overreaching.  Get the details in this month’s update.

Jury Awards $165K to Female Teachers in Equal Pay Act Case Against Central Bucks School District

A Pennsylvania jury awarded $165,000 in damages to two female teachers, Rebecca Cartee-Haring and Dawn Marinello, who successfully claimed that the Central Bucks School District paid them less than comparable male teachers, violating the Equal Pay Act. The verdict, reached after a second trial, followed a mistrial in 2023 and the decertification of the case as a collective action. Representing the teachers, attorney Edward Mazurek rejected the district’s portrayal of the outcome as a compromise, asserting the jury clearly found long-standing gender-based pay discrimination. The teachers originally sued in 2020, alleging the district inconsistently calculated years of experience based on gender. While Cartee-Haring’s other discrimination claims under Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA were dismissed, her Equal Pay Act claims proceeded. The court required the plaintiffs to compare their pay to specific male teachers rather than a general group, which the district argued differed in responsibilities and qualifications.  The case is Cartee-Haring v. Central Bucks School District, case number 2:20-cv-01995, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Federal Judge Strikes Down EEOC Abortion Accommodation Mandate Under Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

A Louisiana federal judge ruled that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) overstepped its authority in implementing parts of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) by requiring employers to accommodate elective abortions. In a 40-page decision, Judge David C. Joseph granted summary judgment in favor of Mississippi, Louisiana, and four Catholic organizations, vacating portions of the PWFA final rule that included abortion under “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” He ruled that the EEOC unlawfully assumed congressional power and violated federalism principles by mandating accommodations not explicitly included in the statute. Judge Joseph emphasized that Congress passed the PWFA shortly after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, suggesting lawmakers intentionally omitted abortion-related accommodations. He rejected the EEOC’s argument that the PWFA mirrors Title VII’s protections for abortion. The EEOC’s next steps remain uncertain, as the case was remanded for further agency action. The ruling also follows a similar North Dakota case limiting EEOC enforcement against religious organizations.

Trump Anti-DEI Executive Order targeting Law Firm Struck Down by Federal Judge

A D.C. federal judge struck down former President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting WilmerHale, calling it unconstitutional and retaliatory. Executive Order 14250, issued on March 27, 2025, accused WilmerHale of engaging in discriminatory DEI policies, including the use of race-based targets, which the administration claimed violated civil rights laws. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon granted the law firm summary judgment on most claims, ruling the order violated the First Amendment by punishing WilmerHale for representing clients disfavored by Trump, including former inspectors general, Democratic candidates, and those challenging the 2020 election results. The judge emphasized that the order imposed severe sanctions—including terminating federal contracts and blocking firm employees from entering government buildings—intended to cripple the firm’s business, which derives over 30% of its revenue from clients with federal contracts. He also found violations of due process, separation of powers, and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Judge Leon dismissed some claims, such as equal protection and spending clause arguments, but still granted declaratory and permanent injunctive relief. WilmerHale praised the ruling as a defense of constitutional rights. This decision follows similar victories for law firms Jenner & Block and Perkins Coie, who were also targeted by Trump. Other BigLaw firms have either filed suits or reached private deals with the Trump administration, prompting scrutiny from lawmakers.

Jeff Burke is an attorney at MacElree Harvey, Ltd., working in the firm’s Employment and Litigation practice groups. Jeff counsels businesses and individuals on employment practices and policies, executive compensation, employee hiring and separation issues, non-competition and other restrictive covenants, wage and hour disputes, and other employment-related matters. Jeff represents businesses and individuals in employment litigation such as employment contract disputes, workforce classification audits, and discrimination claims based upon age, sex, race, religion, disability, sexual harassment, and hostile work environment.  Jeff also practices in commercial litigation as well as counsels businesses on commercial contract matters.

Filed Under: Articles by Our Attorneys Tagged With: Jeffrey Burke

Dealing with Domestic Violence in Family Law

May 28, 2025 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

Domestic violence issues arise frequently in Delaware family law. A victim of domestic violence should know that they can seek an immediate Protection from Abuse (PFA) Order to safeguard themselves and their children. In an emergency, a victim can and should request an order barring the abuser from having any contact with them. Emergency PFA Orders in Delaware can grant temporary possession of the home and custody, among other forms of relief. These orders typically remain in place until a final hearing on the merits.

After filing for a PFA in Delaware, a domestic violence victim should work closely with their Delaware family law attorney to gather evidence. This may include subpoenaing police officers or medical providers. Common forms of evidence include text messages, video or audio recordings, and photographs.

Before the final hearing, the victim may consider negotiating a consent PFA Order with the other party. While a consent order does not include a legal finding of wrongdoing, it carries the same legal weight as one issued after a full hearing. Consent orders can give the victim greater control over key matters such as temporary possession of the family home, custody of children, and financial support.

Importantly, a Delaware PFA Order prohibits the person subject to the order from owning or possessing firearms while it is in effect. Violating a PFA Order is a criminal offense and can lead to serious legal consequences.

If you have questions about domestic violence legal protection in Delaware, contact Patrick J. Boyer, Delaware family law attorney. Patrick represents clients in a range of matters including domestic violence cases, divorce in Delaware, property division, alimony, child custody and visitation, and child support. He also advises clients on guardianship and third-party visitation. Patrick practices out of the firm’s Centreville, Delaware office.

Filed Under: Articles by Our Attorneys Tagged With: family law, Patrick J. Boyer

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 30
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

  • Articles by Our Attorneys
  • News
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Newsletters

Footer

(610) 436-0100

LEGAL SERVICES

  • Banking & Finance Law
  • Business & Corporate Law
  • Criminal Defense
  • Employment Law
  • Estates & Trusts Law
  • Family Law
  • Litigation Law
  • Personal Injury Law
  • Real Estate & Land Use Law
  • Tax Law

ABOUT US

  • Our History
  • Our Approach
  • Social Responsibility
  • Testimonials

NEWS & INSIGHTS

  • Articles by Our Attorneys
  • News
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Newsletters

OFFICES

Centreville, DE

5721 Kennett Pike
Wilmington, DE 19807
302-654-4454
Learn More

Hockessin, DE

724 Yorklyn Rd #100
Hockessin, DE 19707
302-239-3700
Learn More

Kennett Square, PA

209 East State Street Road
Kennett Square, PA 19348
610-444-3180
Learn More

West Chester, PA

17 West Miner Street
West Chester, PA 19382
610-436-0100
Learn More

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Staff Only
  • Careers

© 2025 and all rights reserved by MacElree Harvey, Ltd.