General legal information furnished as a service of Fort Lauderdale / West Palm Beach family law attorney Janet Langjahr
When does the obligation to pay alimony end? That depends on many factors.
More and more, it is the intention of legislators, courts and divorcing couples that the alimony obligation end when the receiving spouse enters a marriage-like relationship, even if it lacks the ceremonial formality of marriage per se. In other words, “cohabitation”.
But what is “cohabitation”? That depends too.
New York’s highest appeals court recently addressed that very issue. In a case where a settlement agreement provided that alimony terminate if the wife lived with a new significant other for “60 substantially consecutive days”.
The evidence showed that she did in fact live with her significant other for the specified time period. What’s the issue?
Under prior New York case law, the intermediate appellate court concluded that cohabitation required “sharing of finances”. And that this “couple” did not do.
New York’s highest court held that the definition of cohabitation depends on diverse factors and the parties’ intent.
The decision is expected to incite much litigation over cohabitation as applied to the specific facts of particular cases.
Florida’s counterpart to NY law on “cohabitation” sets forth the factors comprising a “supportive relationship”.
Read more in this Newsday article: Court: ‘Cohabitation’ ambiguous in NY divorce law.
Minnesota Father allegedly kidnapped daughter from child protective custody.
Sentence: probation, requiring 40 hours of community service, undergoing a chemical dependency evaluation, undergoing a psychological evaluation, making restitution of costs of Amber Alert.
A year after sentencing, Father has complied with none of the conditions of his parole. None.
Father offers reasons to the court:
Father did fail two court-ordered drug screenings.
Minnesota judge ruled that Father willfully violated the terms of his probation - without excuse. Outcome: Father’s probation was reinstated pending another hearing.
Stakes: criminal record - whether previous conviction appears as a felony or a misdemeanor.
Whether Father is permitted contact with his daughter is not addressed.
Read more in this Winona [MN] Daily News article: Amber Alert dad violated probation.
Connecticut, like Florida, has a mandatory parenting course for divorcing parents.
A Connecticut resident challenged the requirement as an unconstitutional infringement on the fundamental right of parenting one’s children as one sees fit.
The challenger also attacked the requirement as unreasonable, because it is required equally of good parents and bad parents alike. Further, it applies even where it is arguably irrelevant, such as in the case where the child is an infant oblivious to the divorce.
The course in Connecticut, as in Florida, is not on parenting in general but rather on parenting through the transition of separation. For example, the course teaches conflict resolution techniques.
A Connecticut trial court concluded that the state has a compelling interest in facilitating smooth separation transitions. It ruled that the course is not intrusive - because no parent is bound to follow the “advice” offered in the course. A parent is merely required to pay the attendance fee and “sit through” the course.
Although hardly a resounding endorsement of the course’s value, the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling and upheld the parenting course requirement.
For what it is worth, the mandatory divorce parenting course in Florida is shorter and less costly.
Read more in this Hartford [CT] Courant article: Conn. court: Mandatory parenting courses allowable.
A Michigan mother, hearing of Nebraska’s liberally drafted “safe haven law”, allegedly traveled there to abandon her 13 year old adopted son, with impunity.
The mother reportedly abused the boy the entire time the couple had custody of him. Both parents defended that they never wanted the boy, but had to take him in order to adopt another child that they did want.
The adoptive parents tried to return the boy to his biological parents and to previous foster parents on several occasions.
The County is pursuing terminating the adoptive parents’ parental rights to all of their children.
The adoptive parents’ other children, both adopted and biological, have temporarily been placed in child protective custody as well.
The County previously brought a similar termination of parental rights petition, based on child neglect, against the couple, but they dropped it.
Read more in this Detroit News article: County wants abandoned boy, 13.
California Husband and Wife have two young daughters.
Husband puts daughters in family pickup truck.
Husband allegedly assaults Wife in full view of neighbors - and daughters.
Husband drags Wife to pickup truck.
Whereabouts of Wife and daughters were unknown. Ambert alert issued.
Wife and daughters then found at Husband’s parents’ home.
Husband arrested.
Husband allegedly has a history of domestic violence.
October is National Domestic Violence Awareness month.
Read more in this KTLA news article: Man Who Beat and Kidnapped Wife in Custody and this Missing and Murdered Children article: CA Amber Alert - Ortiz Siblings; Jacqueline Martinez.
Israeli Husband and Australian Wife live with their four boys (Boys) in Israel.
Wife takes Boys to Australia, where her parents live.
Wife claims that Husband abandoned his family financially and emotionally, in favor of a girlfriend. Without Husband, Wife felt she needed family support and, she claims, Husband agreed to her relocation with the Boys.
Husband denies abandonment and denies giving consent to Wife and children moving to Australia. He also maintains that Israeli authorities told him not to pay support.
Husband files an application for return of the Boys to Israel under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
The jurisdiction dispute has been winding its way through the Australian courts for quite some time.
The trial court finds that the Boys were not wrongfully removed from Israel, because Husband did give his consent - but revoked it shortly afterward.
Accordingly, although Wife had not wrongfully removed the children, she did wrongfully retain them in Australia.
Wife appeals, but the intermediate appellate court upholds the trial court’s ruling and orders the return of the Boys to Israel.
Wife is seeking an appeal to the highest court in Australia and the court has stayed the return of the Boys until the appeal is concluded.
Meanwhile, Husband recently had his first visitation with the Boys in nearly two years.
Read more in this Australian Jewish News article: Israeli father battling Aussie wife for custody.
Evacuated Hurricane Katrina mother and her five kids from New Orleans end up living in Houston.
Houston woman allegedly takes them all in.
New Orleans biological mother claims Houston woman refused to return the children to her when requested.
Houston woman claims she has raised the children for the past three years - with little financial assistance from New Orleans biological mother.
She also contends that children would be unsafe with biological mother, who she alleges cannot care for them. Child welfare agency does not find those allegations to be supported by evidence.
Police arrest Houston woman on kidnapping charges. Grand jury rejects indicting her - and Houston woman is released.
Houston woman, cut off from all contact, wants New Orleans children back in her life - along with their mother. But she drops her legal case to try to get custody of children.
Read more in this Houston Chronicle article: Woman who took Katrina evacuee’s kids no-billed.
Whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing may depend on how the economy is and which economic expert you are speaking to.
But a study suggests that the spectre of divorce may promote saving - and working.
The study analyzes savings patterns in Ireland both before and after divorce was made legal there in 1996.
In comparison to other Europeans, the Irish upped their savings significantly after 1996.
This increase was especially marked among non-religious couples (who were impacted by the new law more than very religious couples) and singles, who were not particularly affected by the legislative changes.
Implication: people don’t save for something positive, but to protect against something negative (loss of partner’s income).
The study also reports that Irish women re-entered the work force in greater numbers after the statutory divorce scheme changed.
Read more in this New York Times piece: Risk of Divorce Leads People to Save More.
Michigan Husband and Wife have Children together.
Husband allegedly murders Wife.
Husband is sentenced to prison for … a very long time.
Children are adopted by Wife’s sister and her husband.
Husband’s Arizona mother seeks to exercise her court-ordered visitation with Children.
Wife’s sister and her husband withhold visitation.
Court holds adoptive parents in contempt and orders them to allow visitation with Husband’s mother within 90 days and to pay her $500 in attorney’s fees.
Court also transfers jurisdiction to Ohio, where adoptive parents reside with Children.
These rulings may have been different in some other states - and, possibly, even before different judges in Michigan. Welcome to the legal system.
Read more in this Chicago Tribune article: Judge: Slain woman’s kids should see grandmother and this Detroit Free Press article: Tara Grant’s sister found in contempt of court over visitation.
During National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, Steamboat Springs, Colorado’s Advocates Against Battering and Abuse have erected human silhouettes outside the local courthouse, depicting victims of domestic violence.
The organization also started a supervised visitation and exchange program over the summer.
Where there are no specialized facilities and personnel to supervise visitation or exchanges, supervision is provided informally by therapists, family members or the general public. Unfortunately, they lack proper training to ensure compliance or safety.
The new program expects to serve 50 families in this rural area this year.
The program is open to families in need, even if they don’t have a court order. This is an improvement over many supervised visitation and exchange facilities nationwide.
That reduces options for too many families and sometimes creates unreaonably and unnecessarily high risk.
Read more in this Steamboat [Springs, CO] Pilot & Today article: Visitation program helps families.
Child’s home was oppressive with domestic violence.
Child’s most vivid childhood memories are of huddling with her mother and sister.
When she was five, her mother fled, leaving her and her sister with the abuser.
The abuser redirected his focus on the girls.
The abuser mostly had custody of the girls.
But, eventually, they were able to have visitation - and some peace - with their mother.
There eventually came a happy ending for this family.
Child grew up to marry a non-abuser.
Her mother married again, a non-abuser.
Child became community education and prevention specialist at a “Y” Crisis Center.
She is bringing her family’s story to life to help “educate and motivate” others.
With a a multimedia presentation depicting her mother’s and her and her sister’s efforts to move beyond the abuse.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
Read more in this Enid [OK] News & Eagle article: Prevention worker to share her family’s history with domestic violence.
A California Mother is known to the local child welfare agency as a drug user. Mother has had other children taken into protective custody and placed into foster care.
Mother wants to avoid that happening to coming Baby. Mother arranges for this Baby to be adopted through a private adoption.
All is in place. Mother gives birth to Baby at hospital.
And then … local child welfare agency takes newborn Baby into protective custody from the hospital … with a view to placing Baby with a different prospective adoptive mother.
The agency could not care less about the private adoption. It insists that its juvenile dependency case supersedes the private adoption - even though it appears that the dependency case was filed after the private adoption paperwork was completed.
The dependency case is entirely premised on the danger to the Baby if returned to live with the Mother - which was not going to happen.
A court will soon decide who gets the Baby. The child welfare agency has refused to divulge why it removed the Baby before the Baby could be placed into the physical custody of the adoptive parents.
Prrivate adoption attorneys suggests that the local child welfare agency is being punitive toward substance-abusing biological parents like Mother, while their charge is only to protect children. Punishment, where appropriate, should be left to other governmental agencies. If provision is made for the private placement of an otherwise dependent child, a dependency case is a waste of public funds.
The private adoptive parents are angry. And so is the biological Mother, who wanted to insulate this Baby from the foster care system.
Read more in this Ventura County Star article: Custody of local baby in dispute.
Nebraska Father repeatedly rapes thirteen year old Girl (daughter of his girlfriend). Girl conceives Child.
Girl gives birth to Child. Girl voluntarily gives Child up to foster care, intending for him to be adopted.
Foster family seeks to adopt Child. But first, Father’s parental rights must be terminated.
At the termination hearing, it comes out that the state has failed to provide proper notice to the Father and otherwise to protect Father’s rights to due process.
Nebraska law draws no distinction between a father who becomes a father as a result of sexually assaulting a minor, and any other father. They are all the same and the process for terminating their parental rights is the same for all of them.
The termination process was re-started from scratch, this time, with the Father’s rights being fully respected and protected. Following the full procedures comes at the additional expense of six to eight months in the adoptive family’s and Child’s lives and thousands of dollars to taxpayers.
But it should stick, in spite of possible appeals by Father.
The foster family-turned-adoptive family are determined to do what they can to change the laws in Nebraska to streamline termination of the parental rights of a sex offender.
In this case, the Father’s parental rights were terminated as much as anything because he refused to participate in a sexual offender treatment program in jail.
Had he sat through a treatment program then, his parental rights might not have been terminated - and he might eventually have gotten custody of Child.
Nebraska is not unique among the states in this respect.
Read more in this North Platte [NE] Telegraph article: Court documents reveal mistake in adoption case.
Tennesee Husband and Wife have two young boys.
Schoolteacher-intern Wife had affair with former student.
Husband was convicted of shooting and killing Wife’s former student.
Husband was convicted of reckless homicide. Sentencing is pending.
Previously, the Court ordered that Husband and Wife should have equal timesharing with their sons. Then Wife secretly left the area with the children and allegedly was involved with other teenaged boys.
More recently, Wife’s contact with the children was restricted by court order, presumably both for her previous flight and for her exercise of poor judgment with teenaged boys.
And Husband’s contact with the children was also restricted by court order, due to the reckless homicide of which he was convicted.
The Husband was deprived of contact with the children for a year.
As a result of both parents being barred from contact with the children, the Court awarded temporary custody of the boys to the Husband’s mother and sister.
The Court’s charge of determining what is in the best interests of the children is more challenging in this case than in most. So the Court tapped some expert assistance.
The Court appointed a guardian ad litem for the children. (A guardian ad litem is a lay advocate for the best interests of children.)
The Court also appointed a psychologist for the children.
The guardian ad litem recommended more and less restrictive contact between the children and their father.
The psychologist conducted two therapeutically-facilitated visitations between the children and their father.
After the second session, the therapist also recommended both more and less restrictive contact between the children and Husband (now ex-husband).
For the moment, that means visitations that are not supervised by a therapist, but that are supervised by another adult relative.
The Wife has had one therapeutically-supervised visitation with the children.
In time, barring the unexpected, visitation with Husband, at least, would likely be progressively less restrictive.
Husband’s sentencing is coming up early next month. His sentence could range from probation to four years’ incarceratoin.
Thereafter, the family Court will have to decide what is in the best interests of the children with regard to permanent custody of them.
Read more in this Knoxville [TN] News Sentinel article: McLean visits to expand.
Canadian immigrant Father is ordered to pay child support.
Father prefers not to pay child support.
Father allegedly attempts to change his identity to evade child support obligations.
Father is charged with fraud.
And bigamy.
And impersonation by forging citizenship papers.
A lot of charges just to avoid paying child support …
Read more in this Calgary Herald article: Calgary man charged with bigamy, fraud, now charged with impersonation.
Couple seeks help in conceiving child.
Couple has six embryos, frozen, in reserve.
Couple make agreement with embryo storage facility that provides that Wife has final say over what becomes of the embryos.
Then couple decides to divorce.
So, what happens to the embryos?
Husband wants to donate them to some other couple in need.
Wife wants to destroy them.
Wife doesn’t want someone else raising her biological child, and fears future attempts to reach out to her other biological child.
Notably, Husband does not attack agreement as ambiguous or against public policy.
An Oregon intermediate level appeals court recently upheld the trial court’s ruling that the contract is enforceable, and therefore Wife has the right to decide what happens to the embryos.
The court reasoned that this was a “deeply personal life choice” that should not be made by the government or the courts.
Read more in this Medical News Today article: Oregon Appellate Court Rules Frozen Embryos Can Be Destroyed In Divorce Case.
Some custodial parents get absolutely nowhere trying to collect child support. And they might have the impression that their state could not care less.
Not so of the state of Tennessee.
A Tennessee mother sought child support from the alleged father of her baby.
The state of Tennessee contacted the Illinois resident, a married man expecting a child with his wife, by mail. His pregnant wife saw the mail first.
She told his whole family about it.
The alleged father advised the state of Tennessee that this was a case of mistaken identity. In support of his position, he cited the different middle initials and social security numbers of the presumably real father and himself.
But the state of Tennessee paid him no heed and did not relent in its mission. It next served the alleged father’s employer with a wage garnishment order for child support.
And then the straw that broke the camel’s - alleged father’s - back: the state of Tennessee served his employer with an order to add the child to his health insurance coverage.
All commendably efficient on the part of the state of Tennessee … if they only had the correct father.
But they didn’t.
Which, to their credit, they did eventually realize.
But not before subjecting the alleged father to a good deal of embarrassment, stress and frustration.
As a result, the alleged father filed a lawsuit against the state of Tennessee.
For defamation of character, to the tune of more than $50,000 in damages - plus punitive damages.
One can only wonder whether the state of Tennessee goes after all alleged deadbeat parents with the zeal with which they pursued this alleged father.
Read more in this [Madison County, Illinois] Record article: State of Tennessee sued for seeking child support from wrong man.
Big corporations, their shareholders and employees aren’t the only ones hurt by the shaky economy. Nor are small businesses, their owners and employees.
In San Antonio, community resources are noting other increasing casualties of the financial markets: there is reportedly a marked rise in the incidence of child abuse - especially child sexual abuse.
One local facility, ChildSafe, aims to help children in crisis and their families.
Their Teddy Bear Room is equipped with stuffed animals to make children more comfortable before law enforcement interviews them.
Lately, the Teddy Bear Room (and similar places) are being utilized by hundreds more children than usual.
Over the last six weeks alone, ChildSafe has had twice as many child abuse victims come through their doors.
Even families they’ve helped in the past are seeking additional services now due to the economic slump.
Sadly, troubled families and/or family members have to remember and be reminded that their children are not at fault.
Read more in this [San Antonio, TX] WOAI NBC TV article: Poor Economy May Lead To Child Abuse Crisis.
Massachusetts family court awards visitation to Father. Mother and children move to New Hampshire.
Father picks up kids in New Hampshire for visitation - but doesn’t return them. Massachusetts court says it can do nothing.
Father allegedly absconded with children to Brazil, using bogus birth certificates for the children and a reportedly forged letter from Mother. The Mother learns that the children were sighted there.
What stands out about this case is that the Mother is close friends with a state representative. Unfortunately, the effort to politicize the case does not seem to be speeding up or improving the outcome. Even though the representative is very motivated to get up to speed on the procedures governing international child abductions.
The Mother has filed an application for return of the children to the US with the US State Department. But, despite Mother’s connections, the case is progressing slowly. The Mother blames it on bureaucracy and lack of interest.
The Mother is concerned that the delay will permit removal of the children to yet another country. One that may not be a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
The Mother has been advised not to head to Brazil to bring the children back herself. Like so many other parents in this situation, in the final analysis, there doesn’t seem to be much she can do, except wait and hope.
Read more in this New Hampshire Seacoast article: Support grows for mother of 2 missing girls.
A Canadian woman is fighting termination of her parental rights to her 8 and 10 year old daughters.
The children are in child protective custody while their mother serves time on the charge of “corrupting children”.
The kids were reportedly found sleeping on the floor next to a litter box in a home in which there was no food or refrigerator, but cocaine was in easy reach.
Addicts were shooting up in plain sight of the children.
Conditions were so horrendous that the call to the police to report the neglect of the children actually came from the mother’s alleged drug dealer.
Read more in this Calgary Herald editorial: Kids should come first.
Florida Father imprisoned for one year for nonpayment of almost $30,000 of child support.
After being sentenced, Father agreed to pay $5,000 and his employer agreed to pay the balance of his back support, to get Father back on the job.
The child’s mother had no objection. The prosecutor had no objection.
But the judge wouldn’t go along with it. He didn’t think someone convicted of a crime should be able to buy a sentence reduction. He felt it was “unseemly”.
The judge wanted parents who are obligated to pay child support to understand that nonpayment is a serious offense, which could land them in jail.
Unfortunately, the child in question, who is ill, will have to go without any support to speak of while Father serves his time.
And the child needs medications and regular care.
Sort of a hollow victory.
Read more in this Tampa Tribune article: Judge Firm On Prison Term For Shirking Child Support.
When there’s a custody dispute, usually it’s between the parents of the child.
But not always. Sometimes its the grandparents who are battling with one of the parents.
And there are still more possibilities - in fact. Probably very long shots under the law.
A California stepfather grasped at one of those possibilities as his marriage was breaking up.
The man picked his stepson up from school.
The man’s car was spotted almost immediately by a retired Department of Justice officer.
With the California Highway Patrol in pursuit, the man stopped his flight.
The man was arrested on kidnapping charges for taking off with his stepson.
Read more in this Modesto Bee article: Stockton kidnap suspect arrested in Modesto.
Some Cambodians are dissatisfied with their divorce courts - even more so than people in this country are with ours.
A Cambodian Husband decided to divorce his Wife, because he didn’t feel that she tended to his care during an illness.
They decided to try to circumvent the courts as much as possible in their separation.
Husband was willing to leave the kids with Wife, without any wrangling.
As to property, under Cambodian law, it is divided equally.
And so it was.
Husband sawed the couple’s house in half, right down the middle.
A quick, inexpensive resolution, if not entirely satisfactory.
Read more in this Earth Times article: Cambodian husband takes half the house in divorce - literally.
Canadian Husband and Wife separate. But it doesn’t go smoothly.
Husband gets idea that Wife wants to relocate with couple’s Son. Wife insists she promised to remain in the same area.
According to friends of Husband, he is a “nice guy”. Even though he warns Wife that any relocation will be “over [my] dead body”.
Unfortunately, it appears that Husband isn’t exaggerating or speaking figuratively.
While Husband has Son with him for visitation, Husband allegedly kills Son and himself, by carbon monoxide poisoning.
To block a relocation that probably would not have happened anyway.
Son was just three years old at the time of his death.
No indication whether there was a prior history of violence or more pointed recent threats.
Read more of this sad story in this Calgary Herald article: Custody battle blamed for killing.
Older Canadian couple married ten years. Husband is two decades older than Wife.
Husband buys lottery ticket. Winning ticket will pay out $3.5 million Canadian.
Husband alleges Wife stole his winning ticket, gave it to her daughter and received a substantial gift from her daughter from the winnings. Husband also alleges that Wife manipulated his medications to facilitate taking advantage of him.
Then Wife files for divorce.
Then Husband brings a civil lawsuit against Wife, her daughters and their husbands and Wife’s grandson and his wife.
Then police arrest Wife and one of her daughters on fraud, forgery and possession of stolen property.
Civil suit judge freezes the assets of the whole lot of them - and orders them to prepare inventories of all purchases with the lottery winnings.
Wife’s defense in the civil suit appears to be that she spent some of the “gift from her daughter” on Husband.
Wife admits only that she did not tell Husband that his ticket won until that piece of news was published in the papers.
Read more in this Canadian Press article: Windsor, Ont., man claims wife stole winning lottery ticket before divorce filed and this Windsor Star article: $3.5M lottery lawsuit leads to family’s arrest.
Two men took a stand on a crane on Ohio State University’s campus in support of fathers’ rights in child custody disputes.
Dressed as superheroes, they called on Ohio’s and California’s governors to start investigations into their states’ respective family court systems.
They claim that the courts are corrupt because perjury consisting of false allegations is not prosecuted.
The men described their actions as “civil disobedience” which is necessary to draw the public’s attention to the fact that the deck is unfairly stacked against fathers in family court.
The University declined to comment on the men’s actions and Ohio’s governor is declining to act on the men’s calls to investigate the state’s family courts.
Probably not the most effective lobbying technique but …
Read more in this [Columbus, OH] WCMH NBC 4 article: Day 3 For 2 Dads On A Crane.
Quebec couple married for twelve years, after living together for seven years. Husband is more than 20 years older than Wife.
Husband is a judge. Wife is a perpetual student, working temporary and/or part-time jobs from time to time during the marriage.
Husband has accumulated nearly one million dollars in retirement savings, most of it during the marriage.
Quebec apparently has a property division framework similar to the equitable distribution principles in effect in Florida and many other US states, with marital property generally being divided equally unless there are special circumstances.
Husband contended that this was such a case and that it would be unjust to divide his pension evenly because Wife hadn’t contributed financially to the marriage and he had borne most of the financial responsibilities in the marriage. Sort of an attempted revival of a bygone legal standard for property division.
At trial, the Court rejected Husband’s argument and gave the Wife half of the portion of Husband’s pension that was marital.
On appeal, the intermediate level appellate court reversed.
On the second tier appeal, the Supreme Court reversed again, holding that equal division of the marital portion of Husband’s pension was not so inequitable as to warrant setting aside the trial court’s ruling. The court looked to the fact that it was a joint decision of the marital partnership that Wife go to school and only work part-time or sporadically.
Read more in this Montreal Gazette article: Judge’s ex entitled to half his pension.
Once the divorce is out in the open, sometimes activity on the credit cards of one or both spouses suddenly escalates.
This can happen due to one spouse’s lack of cash to live on. It can also happen due to the malice of a spouse. Or any number of other reasons…
Both spouses’ credit ratings can potentially experience dramatic impacts in a very short timeframe.
A mortgage broker offers advice on protecting your credit.
It may be prudent to order a credit report early in the game, to gather all the pertinent debt information.
What is the current outstanding balance of each debt?
Is each debt secured or unsecured?
Who is legally responsible to the creditor on each debt?
(Which may have nothing to do with who family court assigns payment of the debt to.)
Does the current value of any security exceed the amount of the outstanding balance?
Can the security be sold to pay the debt?
Of course, while protecting your credit rating is important, sometimes there are other considerations as well.
Like short-term survival until court-ordered temporary support.
Sometimes the steps you should take to protect your credit rating will also deny you much-needed short-term access to credit to cover living expenses.
Read more in this American Chronicle article: Protecting Your Credit During Divorce.
An elderly Singaporean Husband wants a divorce from his Wife - after more than twenty-five years of marriage.
Husband alleges that his Wife has engaged in “unreasonable behaviour, distrust and irresponsibility”, mostly pertaining to money.
The Wife denies the allegations and further alleges that the Husband is guilty of bigamy and harassment.
The Wife is Husband’s third wife.
Husband’s second wife, of twenty-four years, died, but the first wife cheated on him with his own brother.
A veteran of two long-term marriages, Husband is 96 years old.
Read more in this Australian article: 96-year-old seeking divorce.
| Listen to Janet |