B.C. Sepertor court (02/23/2017 11:57am Clark of the Court, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Family Court Domestic Relations Branch ‘KATHLEEN BUHLE BIDEN ) ) Plaintiff, } Civil Action No, 16 DRB 4433 ) % ) Judge Craig Iscoe ) ROBERT HUNTER BIDEN ) Next Event: Status Hearing Maren 30, 2017 Defendant. ) ei ecbeekian ainsi 1 AP) ‘MOTION TO ENJOIN FURTHER DISSIPATION OF MARITAL ASSETS Pini, Kathleen Buble Biden, is this Motion to Enjoin Further Dissipation of Mari Assets in ight ofthe Defendant, Robert Hunter Biden, dissipating hundreds of ‘thousands of dollars of marital funds during the parties’ separation, ‘The parties now have significant debt and lnited assets, ue to Mr. Biden's dsipation of assets and Ma, Biden ‘Toquests an order to prevent further dissipation of the remaining marital assets and the expected marl income of Mr. Biden. In further uppor of her mation, Ma Biden rexpealy states as fllows PACTUAL BACKGROUND 1. The parties hereto seperated on or about October 2015, due ieconiable ferences concerning Mr. Biden's conduc, including drug use and infidel. 2. Mr. Biden 1come has been the sole source of funds to support the Family throughout the entirety ofthe parties’ marriage. ‘The family’s finances arehandled through “Mr. Biden’s office, which is tasked with paying recurring bills from the patie’ joint USAA Biden. Biden, Cas No, 16 DRB 4433 Plains Motion to Enjoin Dissipation of Asses Page 1 oF 10‘banking account, and making monthly transfers to Ms. idea's USAA account so oinly tite, with Ms. Biden asthe primary usr) 3, Throughout the pais’ separation, Mr. Biden has created financiel concerns forthe family by spending exravagtny on his own interests Gineding drugs, alcohol, prosittes, stip lbs, and gifts for women with whom he hss sexual relations), while leaving the family with no finds to pay legitimate bills 4. Onoraround October 2016, Mr. Biden instructed hs olfice to reduce the fans they transfer to Ma, Biden 07,500 per month. The monthly transfer had previously averaged around $17,000 per month. Since thattime, suppor for Ms Biden and the pris" cllden, aswell asthe overall finances ofthe parties, hasbeen a significant source of apace. 5. Ingpite of sigan reducing avilable nds forMa, Biden andthe children, Mc. Biden sere contmsed spend lavishly, while complaining to Ms, Bide, through counsel, bout the Grancal issues ofthe family and Mi, B dens pending 6, Recently, a the Finances have become stained and» pint of dispute ‘between the pres, Mr. iden instructed a large payment of mat income (122,179 be ‘made to 8 TD Bank account in his sole name to which nether his office nor Ms. Biden has access, On information and belief, taxes were not withheld from tese finds, augmenting Biden: Bide, Case No. 16DRB 4433 Plinui's Moton to Esoin Dissipation of Asset Page 0107. Inaddion, after instructing Ms, Biden att use teint USAA account for family expenses clsining the finds were earmarked for atopeymeats, over the course of the past month, Mr. Biden transferred $4200 from the acount and withdrew th funds in cash, 8. Mr Biden bs cotaued to incur ret ard debt on any availble cards — including an American Expres card on which Ms Biden was he primary ascount hoe. He has maxed ot avaiable cash advances, He also, with no notice to Ms Biden, transferred money to himself rom an account solely in Ma, Biden's name (whic the bank Inter reversed) His spending rarely relatstoeiimat fa ly expenses, but focuses on his ‘own travel (at times multiple hotel rooms on the same night), gifts for other women, alcohol, strip clubs, or other personal indulgences. 9. Onor about February 17, 2017, Ms. Biden leaned that Mr. Biden was in possession ofa large diamond, on information and belief worth approximately $80,000, ‘When Ms, Biden through counsel, asked Mr. Biden to place the diamond in a safety deposit ‘box accessible only to both parties together, Mr. Biden, through counsel, denied possession ‘of the diamond. See atached Exhibit A. Mr. snow admis though counsl, tat he ‘was in possesion ofa diamond, but asses ta it hasbeen returned to the enity tha gaveit tohim 10, Theres’ outstanding debts are shocking and overwhelming. The pares have maxed-out credit-card debt, double mongages on both real properties they own and tx debt of at east $13,970, The pate’ have bounced three checks to their housekeeper, and Buon Bude, Car No.6 DB 483 Plant Motion o Enoin Dissipation of Assets Page of10‘owe medical provides and therapists fr oustanding ils. The smal remaining Liquid ‘nds and ~ more importantly -the income Mr, Bien wil ean between now snd the ime oF ‘wal are este to the faily 11, Mr. Biden continues to spend extravagantly and if allowed to continue to do so wil daipae al the remaining mat asst as wel asthe income hei eacng—income con which thefaily depends to meet their nesds and expenses LEGAL ANALYSIS, ‘As recognized by D.C. Code §16:10(8),“isspsion ithe dapeston of marl property by a spouse ina manner intended to "circumvent the equitable istitution ofthe rata eat! Herron v. Johnson, 74 A24 783, 786 (D.C. 1998) (station nite) Dissipation "may be shown by prima fice evidence unrebuted thatthe spouse sed marta property for sor her own benefit and fora purpose unrelated tothe mariage et ime when the mariage wes undergoing en imeconiable breakdown.” 1d. “Mt would deal be Aeninst the Legislature's stated pble policy to pemit one spouse to squander marital property and render it imposible to make an equitable award of property. dat 785 (auotng with pprovel Sharp » Sharp, 58 Mé, App. 386,473 A.24 499, 505 (Md. App. 1984), In large part because of Mr. Biden's behavior, the parties have limited assets despite his significant earnings. Unless stopped, Mr. Biden's continued dissipation will result in the inrtrievable loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars by the time this case is resolved, uonv.Bidan, Case No, 16 DRB 4433 Pinus Motion o Eoin Dissipation of Assets Page of 10preventing distibution to Ms. Biden of her equitable share of marital property. This is, extremely prejudicial tothe rights of Ms, Biden andthe children For tat reason, Ms. Biden asks the Court now to enjoin Mr, Biden's further Aissipation of marta assets, pending resolution of her Complaint for Absolute Divorce and Other Relief In considering a request for preliminary injunction," the Court must consider our factors: (1) likelihood of irreparable harm in te absence of « preliminary injunction; (@)likelitood of success on the merits in the underlying cause of action; (3) [whether] the “balance ofinjris favor grating an injunction nd (4) [whether the public interest would be served by granting the injunctive elie ough” J. Disrier of Columbia, 665 ‘A.2d185, 117-188 (D.C. 1998) (ctasons omit). “The Court of Appeals has sated tht he rt ators of gents concen: “While it in fundamen tothe granting of an ijuntion that the court make sii findings on all prerouisits for such elie the mos important inquiry shat conceing irreparable injury.” Inve Antioch Universi, 418 A.24 105, 19 D.C, 1980) (Enphassin orginal; citations omitted). That is boceuse the “primary justifieation forthe issuance of preliminary injunction ‘is always to prevent irreparable injury so as to preserve the court's bility o ender a meaningful decision on the merits.” id, (citations omitted), As discussed above, pemitsing Mr. Biden to continue to spend marital funds in exorbitant amounts on| personal interests would result in significantly less ‘and, would significantly impede the Cours ability to engage in the equi "Pai ig ot ewening «permanent incon because eck axtywil have cout of iso kerown property and ast upon tie Gots esolion equitable istnbuon ad spp ses ‘iden. Bae, Case No, 6 DRB 4433 Phinti's Motions Eoin Dissipation of Assets Page Sofmarital property. Moreover, «decison by ths Court to require reimbursement to Ms, Biden ‘versione might well be unenforceable or only parialy enforceable, as Mr, Biden's drug use and recess behavior could utimately rest parlor complete los of earings. “With regard tothe second factor, Ma, Biden has a substantial ikeinod of success on the merits, As dscused above, Mr, Biden's conduc falls squarely under the category of sipation nd Ms. Biden believes tat itis ikely that, upon consideraton of the evidence, this Court wl ind tat she i enied to compensation Fr that dssption. ‘With regard tothe third factor, assole income-earer, Mr. Biden ha and exercises complete contol over mail finances, Because hes abusing that conto by providing Ms Biden with inadequate funds to support here andthe pares children and by spending his carrings without imitation, the balance of injuries favors an junction paint rer Alssipation, Finally, as Herron v. Jolmson supra, makes clear, there isa strong pubic interes in preserving marital asst nd pemiting the court to carry out role WHEREFORE, Plain respetly request that his Court 1. Exjoin Defendant fom Further isspation of marl esos 2. Onder tht al funds eared prior ofl and final resolution o his matter be place intoan escrow account, and that Ms, Biden recive an allocation of $2,000 per month and Mr, Biden receive an allocation of 5,000 per monthand al other ase be wid ony as jin agreed between the parts to pay family expenses and debts, and Auden ide, Cave No. 16 DRB 4433 atts toate Enjoi Dispton Aste‘Order that all assets received by Mr. Biden in lieu of income or otherwise as remuneration be placed into a safety deposit box accessible only by both parties Jointly; and Reserve the issue of Defendant's dissipation of marital assets to date for resolution at «final merits hearing inthis matter; and Reserve the issue of Plaintiff's attomey’s fees and costs with respect to this motion for a final merits hearing in this matter, and Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and appropriate, Respectfully submitted, ‘Ws! Rebekah JH. Sullivan ‘Rebekah TH. Sullivan, Beg. ‘Kuder, Smollar, Friedman & Mihai, P.C. 1350 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 600 ‘Washington, DC 20036 ‘Telephone: (202) 331-7522 ‘Facsimile: (202)331-0388 Counsel for Plaintiff ‘POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, DC. Code §16-910(0); Herron v. Johnson, 714 A.2d 783, 786 (D.C. 1998); {Ifill v. District of Columbia, 665 A.2d 185 (D.C. 1995); In re Antioch University, 418 A.24 105 (D.C. 1980), ‘The record herein; ‘The authority of the Court. Biden, Biden, Case No, 16DRB 4433 Plats Motion to Exjin Disipationo Assets age To 10,‘CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE [hereby cerity that a copy ofthe foregoing Motion ro Enjoin Further Dissipation of ‘Marital Assets was sere via Case File Express this 23rd _ day of February, 2017, t0 Serah Mancineli, Esquire, Counsel for Defendant ‘Us/ Rebekah JH, Sullivan ‘Rebekah TH, Sullivan Biden Biden, Case No, 16 DRB 439 ‘Paiti's Motion to Enjoin Dspation of Assets Paget‘SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Family Court Domestic Relations Branch ‘KATHLEEN BUBLE BIDEN ) d Plaintf, }) Givi Action No. 16 DRB 4433 ) v ) Judge Craig Iscoe ) ROBERT HUNTER BIDEN Next Event: Status Hearing )—-Mareh 30, 2017 Defendant. ) 3 ORDER ‘Upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion to Enjoi Further Dissipation of Marital ‘Assets, itis this__day of, 2017, ORDERED that PlsinfP's Moion be andit hereby is GRANTED; and itis futher ‘ORDERED tat al funds earned by Mr. Biden prior 08 fll and final resolution of this mater sl be placed into an escrow account, and that Ms. Biden may recive an stlocation of vp o $20,000 per month end Mr. Biden may resive an allocation of upto $5,0 per manth; and its futher ORDERED that no other withdrawals hall be made frm the escrow account except 2s jointly agreed between the partis; and itis further ORDERED tat al assets received by Mr. Bide neu of ncome or otherwise 8 ‘remuneration be placed int a sary deposit box accesible only by both partes join, and itis funher iden Biden, Case No. W6DRBAASS Plats Maio o Enis Dissipation of Assets Page 9 of 10ORDERED that the issue of Defendants dissipation of marital assets is reserved for the fll merit hearing in this matter, andi is further ORDERED that the issue of attomey’s foes is reserved for the full merits hearing in this mater, ITISSO ORDERED. The Honorable Craig Iscoe District of Columbia Superior Court Copies to: Rebekah JH. Sullivan Case File Express Counsel for PaintitE Surah E. Mancinell Case Pile Express Counsel for Defendant Dido Bide, Cane No. JEERD 4433 ‘Piti's Motion to jon Dispation of Assets Page 1018