TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #6

[hollyblue]

When an active employee is holding a 401(k), there are strict rules on withdrawals, regardless of penalty. The funds become available for any use, with penalties, depending on age, after employment is severed.

So, he can now access his...

I believe he could have accessed his anytime with the reason of hardship. ??

 

[Pearl*]

What does that mean? The Chancellor dissolved the restraining order.

Is it for everything in the filing or part?

fran

Well, I think it means he's hit a home run, Fran.

Matt used to snap his fingers and make Gail hop.

Now he snaps his fingers and the Court is hopping.

Controllers don't like to be told what to do, and my experience has been that they are especially sensitive to timetables. They make their own and expect others to meet the demands. Usually the timetable demands urgency. This is one way abusers keep their victims off balance, by refusing to give them time to think things through--especially after she leaves him.

He's simply continuing his same behavior pattern, and the Court is letting him get away with it.

He decided when the hearing would take place, asserted his dominance in having it before Diane or Kevin could possibly get to the courthouse, and he got everything he wanted in Court today.

I'd bet that he's hand-picked the children's counselor and that Gail's funds will evaporate before you can say modsnip.

There was no justice for Gail or the children today.

 

[Pearl*]

From Callie Starnes:

B/c relief in this case too similar to legal separation filed previous by Matthew Palmgren, future cases to be heard by other judge.

ETA: Opposing sides chat before leaving. Hearing over

That's the only piece of good news I've heard from the courthouse today.

 

[ThoughtFox]

But you know, even though this was a legal loss for Gail's family, it's still important for these things to be on the record. They asked about specific things and got no answers, but the asking is still important because it put MP on the hot seat again, and pressured the attorneys to go on the record.

And a few things came out: MP and the kids go to Wetumpka to "get away from the media."

Really? He would rather be in AL next-door to Arlene than in his secluded house on Signal Mt? Hmmmm.

And one fascinating detail - Davis says he was in the process of getting DNA tests from MP and the kids. Why? Because LE must have requested it in order to test samples of . . . something . . . from the house search so they can rule out the rest of the family. I think that's big.

 

[hollyblue]

Can the attoney refile? Doesn't sound like Judge Brown even heard the concerns? Did the attorney even get to present them?

 

[BeanE]

Here are all the reporters' tweets from the hearing:

http://casesignal.files.wordpress.c...ng-order-emergency-hearing-june-29-tweets.pdf

 

[ThoughtFox]

Can the attoney refile? Doesn't sound like Judge Brown even heard the concerns? Did the attoney even get to present them?

No, nothing much was presented because the Judge jumped in and ruled that the filing wasn't proper because it was written in language as if the siblings were making divorce demands on MP in Gail's absence.

But another Judge will hear the rest of it in the future - the reporters there will probably get the date of the next hearing.

 

[CatFancier]

I believe he could have accessed his anytime with the reason of hardship. ??

He could have taken a loan (depending on the limits available to him per the plan rules) of up to 50% of the vested balance.

ETA: Hardship is limited to covering funeral expenses, college education, purchase of a primary residence, etc.).

 

[ThoughtFox]

He could have taken a loan (depending on the limits available to him per the plan rules) of up to 50% of the vested balance.

ETA: Hardship is limited to covering funeral expenses, college education, purchase of a primary residence, etc.).

I think it's really simple.

MP didn't like Gail having all that "free" money while his was tied up.

And he viewed her money as his money, and there for the taking, which is what he did.

It's selfish and cold, but that didn't bother him either, apparently.

And no one on his legal team seems able to figure that Gail's "paranoia" might come from having her money frittered away.

 

[Pearl*]

No, nothing much was presented because the Judge jumped in and ruled that the filing wasn't proper because it was written in language as if the siblings were making divorce demands on MP in Gail's absence.

But another Judge will hear the rest of it in the future - the reporters there will probably get the date of the next hearing.

So, if the filing was so improper, why did the Chancellor sign it in the first place? What happened between Friday and today? Frank Brown made all sorts of write-in provisions before signing it on Friday, so that it would meet his approval.

I think the ruling was decided before the hearing took place. Sickening.

 

[ThoughtFox]

So, if the filing was so improper, why did the Chancellor sign it in the first place?

I think the ruling was decided before the hearing took place. Sickening.

It did seem rather quick and dirty. :twocents:

 

[MacKat]

Really? He would rather be in AL next-door to Arlene than in his secluded house on Signal Mt? Hmmmm.

And without electricity....

 

[hollyblue]

Where's Gail!

 

[ThoughtFox]

Really? He would rather be in AL next-door to Arlene than in his secluded house on Signal Mt? Hmmmm.

And without electricity....

Good catch!!! :crazy: I think the other attorneys didn't even have time to see that contradiction.

Yes, drag the kids over 100 miles away to a home without electricity, next door to Arlene.

That's a good reason to overturn a restraining order, if the kids have good report cards. Good grief!

 

[hollyblue]

Good catch!!! :crazy: I think the other attorneys didn't even have time to see that contradiction.

Yes, drag the kids over 100 miles away to a home without electricity, next door to Arlene.

That's a good reason to overturn a restraining order, if the kids have good report cards. Good grief!

I know AD stated the electricity was turned off at the A Frame, but also the property on Easy St?

 

[BeanE]

I know AD stated the electricity was turned off at the A Frame, but also the property on Easy St?

Arlene said he'd taken the kids up there several times since Gail disappeared, so I would hope just the Aframe.

 

[Oriah]

Arlene said he'd taken the kids up there several times since Gail disappeared, so I would hope just the Aframe.

You know, I've been wondering for awhile now what payments were being made on utilities, mortgages, vehicles, taxes etc- and by whom out of which account(s). Anyone have any thoughts on this? Or maybe I missed it early on?

 

[Columbo]

So as far as the hearing goes, I think it's what we were talking about yesterday ~ the siblings really can't dictate anything about marital assets, property, or the children. According to the law, Gail is still "alive" right now and still married to MP, and she is their next of kin not her siblings, and that's why the Chancellor said "this isn't a divorce case" (although technically it is, and he even mentioned MP's filing for separation).

Oy, what a mess!

bolded by me.

I wonder if this would hold true if she has a revocable trust and will, and MP is not a Trustee, maybe her siblings are. Maybe she changed her trust/will when they started talking divorce. I hope so. This must fall into a gray area if she is missing and presumed alive. This is totally speculation. I'm not an expert on this and I'm just throwing it out there. Besides, I don't even know if she was prepared with a trust and a will.

 

[Columbo]

No, nothing much was presented because the Judge jumped in and ruled that the filing wasn't proper because it was written in language as if the siblings were making divorce demands on MP in Gail's absence.

But another Judge will hear the rest of it in the future - the reporters there will probably get the date of the next hearing.

It didn't sound like "divorce demands" to me! Anyone else???

 

[Pollywog]

I think companies set up 401K's differently. Mine that I have now, I can access money via a loan and pay myself back with no penalty unless I fail to pay it back, then I am tossed out of the plan. If I get a hardship distribution, I have to stop contributing to the plan and hardship has some strict guidelines. At age 59 1/2 I can take money out and not have to pay it back and have no penalty except the tax liability on the funds. My husband cannot get a loan, nor take any money out of his and if he claims hardship, he has to prove for mortage or college tuition and is out of the plan for how many ever months, plus pays the tax liability. Is it possible she rolled her 401K into just a regular money market or savings account and that is how they had access to it? I have a money market account that is set aside for additional retirement funds, I can get the money, but I pay taxes on it. I just don't think an actual 401K can be accessed as easily as it seemed they were doing it. MOO