Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boynton Beach

October was first recognized as Domestic Violence Awareness Month twenty-two years ago.

Twenty-two years later, here in Florida, two different mothers and their respective children are murdered in domestic violence incidents.

Both families have histories of domestic violence.

Clearly, the problem of domestic violence is far from solved.

What are we doing wrong?

Professionals working with victims must learn to properly assess the degree of danger in each case.

And, regardless, professionals must also be able to provide each victim with an effective, custom safety plan.

These two measures should go a long way toward reducing domestic violence fatalities (and injuries).

Hopefully, these milestones won’t take another twenty-two years of awareness to accomplish.

Read more in this Ft. Myers [FL] News Press article: Better protection needed against domestic violence.

Colorado has legal gambling casinos in several towns there.

Father (or Mother) goes to a casino to play.

And wins. Pretty big. At least $1,200. Maybe substantially more.

Father (or Mother) gathers up their winning chips and goes to cash out.

There’s a bit of a delay.

Finally, Father (or Mother) is handed their, uh, net proceeds.

Father (or Mother) complains that they’ve been shorted on their winnings.

Wrong.

Under a recent Colorado law, before cashing out any player who wins at least $1,200, the casino is required to check child support computer system records to determine whether the winner owes any back child support.

If the winner does owe back child support, the arrearages are collected by deduction from their winnings.

This new law has resulted in collection of $600,000 in statewide child support arrearages in just the first year. Not bad.

Casinos aren’t thrilled about the new law. Their customers get angry. And following the law is a nuisance.

Worst of all, casinos fear it is already starting to deter deadbeat gamers from turning out at the casinos.

In other words, deadbeat parents are actively avoiding an opportunity to meet their child support obligations with found money won at the casinos.

This casts some doubt on various special interest groups’ vigorous assertions that those who don’t pay child support don’t pay because they can’t afford it.

Colorado was the first state to pass a law like this … although many states require child support enforcement out of lottery winnings.

Other states are watching Colorado’s apparent success and eagerly contemplating trying to duplicate it.

Read more in this Denver Post article: Colorado gambling law garnishes $600,000 from winnings of deadbeat parents.

Residents of Maine will be voting next week on proposed legislation intended to broaden and simplify usage of marijuana for medical purposes.

What does that have to do with family law?

Well, one of the proposed provisions prohibits discrimination against patients in child custody matters.

A significant number of people have allegedly lost custody of their children just because they use medical marijuana – or grow it.

Specifically, the proposed legislation provides that patients cannot be deprived of custody or (presumably, unsupervised) timesharing or visitation unless their marijuana use renders them “unreasonably dangerous” to their child.

In other words, under the proposals, it would be illegal discrimination to deprive a parent of custody (or unsupervised visitation) just because the parent’s behavior with marijuana use makes the parent merely dangerous to their child.

Ironically, this kind of proposed language may give a medical marijuana user an advantage over a non-user … not to mention over their child. Who may only be in danger, but not unreasonable danger.

Read more in this Drug War Chronicle newsletter article: Feature: Maine Medical Marijuana Dispensary Initiative Ahead in November Election Campaign.

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, as I’ve previously posted.

A UK Husband allegedly pursued his fleeing Wife, each in their own respective cars. Husband rammed Wife’s car and then set it on fire.

Husband was arrested and confined until trial.

Wife was too terrified to testify against Husband at trial.

So Wife, the victim, was put in jail for contempt of court, while Husband was at large.

Because of Wife’s silence, Husband was convicted only of threatening behavior and damaging property.

At the conclusion of his trial, Husband was released due to time already served.

Read more in this UK Mirror article: Scared wife put in cells for ‘contempt of court’ during domestic abuse trial as husband walks free.

US-resident Mother refuses to allow Son to visit Israel-resident Father and attend school there for a year.

Both Israel and the US are parties to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Mother opposes, ironically citing a provision of the Hague Convention intended primarily for the benefit of fleeing victims of domestic violence.

The provision allows a court to refuse an otherwise-required return of a child if there is a serious risk that the child will be harmed, physically or psychologically, by return.

In this context, Mother, like others before her, argues that terrorism strikes in Israel make it too dangerous to order her child there.

Ohio judge partially accepts Mother’s argument. Court rules that child should go to Israel … but is barred from Haifa, Israel.

Other US judges have been in full sympathy with Mother’s argument in denying returns.

An Ohio attorney takes exception to the characterization of Israel as a “war zone” and believes that rulings refusing to return children to Israel aid terrorists at Israel’s expense.

That attorney has established a nonprofit association in Israel to assist parents pursuing return of their children to Israel.

It is reported that ten percent of divorced couples in Israel are new immigrants.

Read more in this Israel Haaretz article: Lawyer from U.S. sets up body to repatriate abducted Israeli kids

Some property acquired during a marriage is easier to split up than other property.

One recently separated couple is learning that now.

Wife has served as chief executive of a professional baseball team acquired during the long-term marriage.

Since the split, Husband has allegedly purported to fire Wife … and assert sole ownership of the team.

Wife, a non-practicing attorney, is reportedly not taking the termination lying down. Quite the contrary, she is rumored to be exploring a takeover.

Their state of residence, California, is a community property state though.

In general, that means that all property acquired by either during the marriage is split 50/50.

Absent a prenuptial agreement (prenup) or postnuptial agreement (postnup), however, that would suggest that both spouses, not just Husband, own the team.

Dividing a major league baseball team of living, breathing people is a bit different from dividing inanimate objects, which neither the objects nor third parties much care about.

In this dispute, there are many opinions being formed and some being expressed – publicly. Although, ultimately, the only opinion that will count is that of the presiding family court judge.

Read more in this Contra Costa [CA] Times article: Jamie McCourt faces uphill fight in court of public opinion and this Los Angeles Times article: Dodgers’ owner Frank McCourt fires wife Jamie.

Four women and one man live in Mississippi House with as many as ten Children.

The House is filthy and blood-stained. The walls are covered by graffiti. Dirty clothes are in piles.

The landlord reacts, “I’ve never seen human beings live like this.” He has served eviction papers on the residents.

One of the Children, a four year old Boy, is now in the hospital, in critical condition. He has internal injuries, broken teeth and damaged gums.

The other nine Children have been taken into child protective custody by the local child welfare agency.

It does not appear that any of the adults living in the House are parents of the Boy. Authorities are looking for them.

The adult residents of the House have all been arrested on felony child abuse charges and are confined.

Read more in this Hattiesburg [MS] American article: 5 face child abuse charges.

Mother and Father separate.

Mother has primary timesharing with eight year old Daughter.

Mother is a hairstylist earning a modest income.

Mother had cancer as a child, but is healthy now.

Mother cannot afford health insurance for herself because it is priced based on her childhood preexisting condtion.

So Mother is unable to provide health insurance for Daughter.

(Father’s health insurance status and whether he pays any child support, medical or otherwise, is unknown.)

So …

Mother gives guardianship of Daughter to Grandparents, who have health insurance.

By virtue of their guardianship of Daughter, Grandparents are able to add Daughter on to their health insurance.

But Mother hates having to give up legal custody of Daughter to her parents … and worries about it … just a bit.

Read more in this Columbia Missourian article: One in 50 million: Ferguson transfers custody to get daughter health coverage.

Preface: In New York State, parents are generally legally responsible for supporting their children until the children are twenty-one years old.

New York State Son, who is under the age of twenty-one, has a full-time retail job.

Despite Son’s employment, Mother currently helps Son pay his bills out of her own earnings and a trust fund.

Mother seeks to be relieved of supporting Son, arguing that Son has emancipated himself by his full-time employment.

Child support obligations typically end when a child becomes emancipated.

An intermediate level appellate court in New York concludes that Son’s job does not constitute emancipation, because Son is not financially independent. Son relies upon additional support from Mother to get by.

Therefore, the New York court holds that Mother cannot terminate her obligation to support Son before he is twenty-one.

Note: In Florida, parents are generally legally responsible for supporting their children only until the children are eighteen years old.

Read more in this West Palm Beach Examiner article: Court says parents in New York cannot contract away obligation to support children until age 21

“Panic rooms”, rooms intended to be secure, even impregnable, were conceived to offer protection to homeowners in the event of a break-in by potentially violent intruders.

The doors to the rooms are extra thick and strong, and can’t be kicked down.

In a county in Wales, UK, homes of high-risk victims of domestic violence are now being equipped with panic rooms, re-dubbed “sanctuary rooms”.

The special rooms have “good neighbour alarms” which, if triggered, alert neighbors to call police.

A domestic abuse advocate believes the sanctuary room has given at least one homeowner her best night’s sleep in years, by finally relieving her domestic abuse-induced terror in her own home.

A person should be able to find sanctuary in their own home.

Unfortunately, though, this sanctuary ends at the door where the victim leaves their home.

Read more in this South Wales [UK] Echo article: ‘Panic rooms’ being built for Caerphilly domestic abuse victims.

Virginia Husband and Wife separate.

They travel to California to appear on Court TV, intending to get their divorce.

Ex-couple returns to Virginia.

Life goes on.

Several years later, Husband and Fiance obtain marriage license.

Husband and Fiance marry.

Wife finds out.

Next thing Husband knows, the prosecutor is submitting a bigamy charge against Husband to a Virginia grand jury.

According to Wife, Husband and Wife never completed the necessary divorce paperwork for unspecified financial reasons.

It is not clear that Husband is aware that his TV divorce from Wife was not final and complete.

A surprising number of spouses in seemingly uncontested divorces in Florida leave it to the other spouse to “take care of” the details of the divorce.

And then simply assume that all is in fact taken care of.

Only to find out, often at a most inconvenient time and place, that the divorce was never finalized – or may not have been.

Moral: if there was a final divorce, there was a piece of paper, called a Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage in Florida, to evidence the divorce. Both spouses (or their respective counsel) should have been furnished copies of it. If it exists, copies should be available from counsel for either spouse or the clerk of court of the appropriate county.

Check on it …

Read more in this Waynesboro [VA] News Virginian article: Attempted TV divorce leads to charge.

Parents in an intact family should designate in each of their wills a guardian for their children in the event of both of their untimely deaths in a common accident.

As soon as their first child is born. If not sooner. No matter the parents’ ages or current health statuses.

The above almost goes without saying.

Otherwise, guardianship must be decided by courts, with a large potential cost and delay, at the children’s ultimate expense. The children could wind up in foster care while the courts are sorting things out.

Once parents split up, each parent should revisit their earlier designations of guardians for their children.

Whether through the passage of time or changes in feelings related to the breakup, either parent (or both) may no longer be comfortable with their original designations.

Generally, both parents must agree on the designation. Not necessarily so easy, at a time when the parents may not be able to agree on blue skies or grey.

Even more difficult, once both parents split up, each parent should now consider the possibility of the death of either parent alone.

Normally, if one parent dies, the other parent will assume sole custody of the children, unless the surviving parent is obviously unfit.

There may be legitimate reasons, however, why one parent would not want the other parent to raise their children alone in the event of his or her own death.

It is also possible that the other parent would be fine at raising the children … but terrible at handling their finances and/or inheritance.

The law allows for guardianship of children to be separated into guardianship of their person and guardianship of their property. With this division of “labor”, a different person can be designated guardian of the children’s property from the person who is designated as guardian of the children’s persons.

While either parent’s designation (or, for that matter, the designation of both) is not legally binding on the court, it is certainly worthwhile for a parent to fully express to the court in writing their feelings on guardianship of their children and their supporting reasons.

It can focus the court’s attention on potential concerns with the other parent or other pre-designated guardians.

Read more in this Kingsport [TN] Times-News article: Deciding guardianship important legal step for parents.

Wisconsin Mother and Texas Father have been involved in lengthy child custody case over 4 year old Son.

Along the way, Father is held in contempt of court, with potential for jail time.

Custody evaluations by Wisconsin and Texas social workers are very close to being filed with the court. Father reportedly knows the recommendation of the Texas social worker.

Mother is stabbed to death at home. Son is at the home at the time.

Father is a suspect in the murder.

Son is with relatives in Wisconsin.

Read more in this Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinel article: Stabbing victim was involved in custody fight.

Tennessee Husband and Japanese immigrant Wife have two children. Couple divorce.

Wife is unhappy in Tennessee. She writes to Husband of her concerns that their children are “losing Japanese identity”.

Over the course of a year, Husband repreatedly asks Tennessee court to prohibit Wife from removing children from the US. These are not idle requests.

In Japan, the noncustodial parent more or less fades out of a child’s life after divorce. Mothers almost always get custody. Foreign parents almost never get custody – or timesharing (or visitation).

The Tennesee court does not really share Husband’s concerns that Wife may abscond with the children. After all, Wife testifies that she will stay in Tennessee; she just wants a vacation with relatives in Japan.

So, passports are released to Wife. Wife and children vacation in Japan.

And return to Tennessee. Wife retains passports.

Then, two weeks later, in August, the children’s school calls Husband to report their absence from school. News to Husband.

Wife is on her way to Japan with their children.

Now Tennessee court awards Husband full custody of the children.

So what is an American father to do?

In this case, Husband goes to Japan, grabs his abducted kids while they are walkling to school, and walks toward the US Consulate.

But before Husband can reach the safe haven of the US Consulate, he is arrested while still on Japanese soil … for kidnapping his own children, of whom he has sole custody under US law.

Husband is now in a Japanese jail, waiting to learn his fate. Wondering: will he be prosecuted for kidnapping his own children, of whom he has sole custody under US law?

Since 1980, Japan has refused to enter the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The US, Canada, Britain and France have all called upon Japan to sign. And resolve numerous cases where abducted children have foreign parents totally cut out of their lives, as though they had never been.

Read more in this Associated Press article via Google: Dad jailed in Japan warned ex-wife would take kids and this CNN article: Group calls for release of American dad jailed in Japan

In an effort to help more people achieve an uncontested divorce, a counseling center is offering mediation services with additional facilitation by social workers.

Although referred to as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), the use of therapists and social workers really transforms mediation into an approach closer to collaborative family law.

This version of ADR is now being enthusiastically embraced throughout Ontario, Canada.

It is anticipated that only rare disputes among broken family members, including abuse and neglect situations, will be settled by a judge after a trial.

The facilitators also teach separating parents better interaction skills. Like parenting coordinators in Florida do.

Proponents trumpet that ADR is typically less damaging for children … and cheaper for parents.

It’s not a solution for every family. But it’s certainly worth trying in most cases.

(Palm Beach County mandates mediation prior to trial and Broward County judges routinely order it as well, in the hopes of residents having a Florida uncontested divorce.)

The addition of the mental health professionals and social workers are helpful in determining what is in the children’s best interests, but it pushes up the cost of ADR and complicates scheduling a mediation when all concerned are available.

Read more in this Thunder Bay Ontario Canada Chronicle Journal article: ADR all about peace.

New York has passed a law that Florida and other states might do well to consider modeling.

The New York statute, in effect, prohibits either spouse from moving monies or other marital assets without court order or written consent of the other spouse. (Except for usual business or household expenses and divorce attorney fees, of course.)

In Florida, things currently work exactly the opposite way. (Except in certain counties that automatically impose a restraint along the lines of the New York statute.)

In most of Florida (including Broward and Palm Beach counties) today, if either spouse wants the court to restrain the other from transferring marital assets, the spouse seeking the restraint must go to court – to try to persuade the court to do it.

The New York legislation saves both spouses litigation expenses, unclogs the courts a bit and preserves the marital assets (or estate) from the get-go of the divorce case.

The new New York law has another feature: it prohibits either spouse from dropping the other spouse or a child from life insurance or medical insurance coverage.

Right now, Florida divorce law presently offers no such protection. A spouse seeking such protection must go to court to try to persuade the court to order it.

New York’s new legislative policy certainly sounds on the mark. Yet the champion of the New York legislation had to work for over a decade to get it passed. …

Read more in this New York City Gotham Gazette article: New Law Protects Assets During Divorce.

Lancaster, PA. Small town USA. Wholesome. Close to Amish country.

Where an affluent, 40-something member (Husband) of a successful funeral home-owning family lived with his Wife and four Children.

The Man had a string of affairs, finally becoming obsessed with one of them (Mistress).

And so, Man allegedly strangled, beat and then drowned Wife, to get her out of the way.

Man planned to marry Mistress. And divorce is such a bother.

Even after his arrest and during his trial, Man continued his obsessive e-mails and calls with Mistress, looking forward to their future together.

And now Man stands convicted of first degree murder, sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Children, now orphans, in effect, are living with relatives.

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

Domestic violence is not a problem limited to any particular economic status, social status, ethnic status or geographic location.

It can happen to anyone, anywhere … by anyone.

Just ask Man’s family.

Read more in this Lancaster [PA] Intelligencer Journal article: Roseboro sentence imposed.

If you’re in an unhappy marriage and contemplating or confronted by the prospect of divorce, you may be past caring about the whys and whether it could have been predicted at the time of your marriage.

But a recent study sheds light on precisely those factors.

And the results may be worth considering for those seeking insight.

The study demonstrated a strong inverse correlation between the spouses’ ages at marriage and their level of age education.

Put another way, people marrying at a later age and having greater education are least likely to divorce.

Why? It’s hard to know for sure, but there are several possible explanations.

First, more mature and educated spouses probably earn more money. Money helps overcome or cope with many challenges.

People who wait to marry also probably have evolved into the person they will be, know who they are and have a better idea of what they are looking for in a life partner.

More educated and older people may also have more discipline and commitment, spurring them to work harder at their marriages. Younger, less educated people may be more impulsive and quicker to give up and move on.

Read more in this UK Guardian | Observer article: US study says divorce is linked to age and education.

Husband is a senior banking executive.

After fifteen years of marriage, Husband, Wife and Children appear to be living the good life.

Except Husband is having an affair.

And so is Wife. Two actually.

But Husband is possessive and unwilling to lose what he has worked to obtain.

Wife is mindful of her “entitlements” under the law and wants custody of their Children.

Husband begins diverting lots of money to separate accounts.

Husband taps into Wife’s e-mails and text messages.

Husband tape records hours upon hours of Wife’s conversations with her lovers.

And finally, Husband allegedly strangles Wife to death.

Husband apparently claims self-defense.

Wife’s body bears bruises practically all over.

Read more in this UK Times article: Bank boss ’strangled his wife after discovering two affairs’.

The agreement to live together should be about more than simply the major decision to live together. That’s probably the easy part. Both parties also need to consider all the issues surrounding living together.

1. Who owns what? How will expenses be met? Debt anyone? Is either one supporting the other? Under what conditions and for how long? What happens regarding assets, debts and support if you decide to part company? Are you relying on any explicit or implied promises? These things should all be spelled out clearly in a written cohabitation agreement

2. How well do you know your partner? Do they have good credit? Are they spendthrifts? Do they pay to take care of their stuff?

3. Is living together just the first step in a more involved and complex merged life plan? Is joint property ownership in your futures? Is a business partnership in your futures? The future may be the best place to leave them until you have tested the “living together waters” adequately.

4. Don’t burn bridges or eliminate all your fallback options. Approximately half of marriages end in divorce. The rate for cohabitating relationships is even higher.

Read more in this Lansing State Journal article: 8 tips to consider when living together.

Not so long ago in Florida, separating parents (and, if necessary, the courts) addressed “child custody”.

The term “child custody” has since been banished from the Florida legal vocabulary and courts.

In the words of one Canadian commentator, Florida has joined the ranks of “label-free” settlements of parental responsibility and timesharing regarding children.

That contrarian voice questions whether this is a change for the better.

She looks to Australia, which she reports adopted a presumption of joint custody in 2006.

After which, she reports, conflict and litigation there escalated, rather than decreased.

“Label-free” parenting arrangements can also leave significant third parties in the dark, such as schools, health care providers, etc., and necessitate cumbersome duplicative communications with and permissions from both parents when the third party is in doubt.

“Label-free” kid-sharing can also tie hands of police and other law enforcement authorities who are unclear as to which parent has rights and is in the right.

Label-free parents, according to this commentator, can even stump judges charged with applying family law in the no-label vacuum.

Read more in this Canadian Lawyers Weekly article: Why custody labels matter.

Old money, multi-millionaire Husband, Wife and their five children live in “ancestral” mansion home in the UK for twenty-odd years.

Couple divorce.

Wife characterizes Husband as a controlling, critical bully, responsible for her depression.

Court orders fifty-nine year old Husband to vacate home … and to stay away from Wife.

Quite unseemly …

Husband appeals, objecting to being evicted from his own parents’ home, without adequate provocation or justification.

Husband asserts that the mansion is large enough to accommodate the entire family, without them tripping over one another.

Husband remains in the ancestral mansion home pending his appeal.

Regrettably, the principle of awarding exclusive use and possession of the marital residence to a dependent spouse and/or caregiver for the minor children of the marriage probably does not take into proper account that some marital residences were ancestral mansion homes before they became marital residences.

Read more in this UK Telegraph article: Wife has husband ‘evicted’ from ancestral home as he makes her ill and this Argus article: Sussex millionaire fighting to stay in his family mansion.

In Europe, London has the dubious distinction of being the “divorce capital of the world”.

Apparently, highly generous spousal support awards are very common in the UK, even in short term marriages.

Traditionally, UK men were the ones paying out. But more recently, British women are often the ones writing large “manimony” checks.

And, not surprisingly, when women are the ones writing the alimony checks, they don’t like it any better than men do.

And it isn’t just the threat of spousal support striking fear into the hearts of well-off women.

Traditionally, UK women have also fared better than men in property division, as in receiving more than half of the property.

More financially able women now fear having the tables turned on them in this regard as well.

Result?

Well, for one thing, in Britain, women are the ones insisting on prenuptial agreements (or prenups) before marriage these days.

For another, important women are clamoring for family law reform to correct systemic injustices now increasingly adversely impacting women.

Other changes in the UK divorce world include social ones encouraging men to seek alimony and more than their fair share of property – and child custody too.

Oh, in the UK nowadays, ten percent of marriages fail within five years.

And attorneys are starting to advise wealthy clients against marrying at all …

Please note that Florida law places great weight on length of marriage in spousal support determinations and presumes an equal division of marital property.

Read more in this UK Times article: Rich woman are suffering painful divorce settlements.

Two year old Son had developmental delays and a deformity of his head.

Allegedly because Father shook him – twice – when he was just two months old.

For that, Father was sentenced to four years of probation … after pleading guilty to felony child abuse.

And given custody of Son in 2007.

Father’s household generated five new allegations of child abuse or neglect in 2007.

And still Father had custody of Son.

Father took Son to doctor to check a shunt placed in Son’s head after he was shaken.

Son didn’t cooperate and his appointment was rescheduled.

Father apparently wasn’t happy. A nurse reported sounds like a spanking.

That night, Father’s wife heard Son screaming.

Son died of blunt force trauma to the head shortly afterward.

Now, Father has been arrested in Son’s death and charged with second degree murder, child abuse and probation violation.

Two babies have been removed from Father’s home since last year.

Read more in this Las Vegas Review-Journal article: Las Vegas man arrested in 2007 death of his toddler son.

Unmarried British Mother and Spanish Father have Daughter together.

Daughter is born in UK.

The family lives in Tenerife Island, Spain for over a year.

Daughter has serious heart condition.

Mother and Daughter return to the UK.

According to Mother, Father encouraged them to return to the UK for family support.

Both Spain and the UK are parties to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Further, Tenerife law, apparently requires formal government permission to remove a child who has lived there for more than a year and who is the biological child of a Spaniard.

Father concedes that he does not take advantage of easy opportunities to visit Daughter and, according to Mother, Father never calls to find out about Daughter.

Nonetheless, some eight months of silence after Mother’s and Daughter’s return to the UK, police appear at Mother’s home and seize her passport.

Mother learns that she is required to return with ill Daughter to Tenerife, to appear in court there for the purpose of determining custody of Daughter.

Father reportedly now wishes to seek custody of Daughter.

Father comments that he does not want to go to court in England … because “it’s not my country”.

So much better to drag his sick child back to court in Tenerife.

Read more in this UK Daily Mail article: Tug of love mother must fly to court in Tenerife to fight for daughter, 5, after being accused of abducting her.