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

Earlier this month, students at Columbia University in New York City held a protest against sexual violence. Roughly 800 of them.

They were participating in “Take Back the Night”, an annual event since 1978.

The program intends to draw attention to the issue of sexual violence in the college setting, and to provide a safe place for its victims.

Sexual assault victims often experience a sense of isolation. The event provides emotional support to them.

Similar marches against sexual violence have taken place across the nation, such as in Decatur, Illinois.

April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

Read more in this Columbia [University] Spectator article: Hundreds take to the streets against sexual violence and this [Decatur, IL] Herald-Review article: Personal stories punctuate Take Back the Night march against sexual violence.

The domestic violence realm is increasingly occupied by perpetrators of stalking … by people who may be thought of as “serial stalkers”.

Take, for instance, this New York Stalker.

Back in 2008, Stalker was first criminally charged with stalking Woman after violating a restraining order of protection against him … by trying to knife his way into her residence. Convicted of misdemeanor counts of stalking and criminal contempt, the criminal court sentenced Stalker to two years’ confinement.

Released early with credit for time already served, Stalker went from a hospital to Woman’s home within hours. And then returned the following night, for more of the same.

At which point Stalker was arrested again. And convicted again.

This time Stalker was sentenced to two to four years’ imprisonment. But Stalker has substantial time served credit and will be eligible for parole all too soon.

This time though, the court has extended the no contact order against Stalker a bit longer. Through June of 2021.

And warned Stalker he would face more charges if he violated the extended restraining order of protection again.

Meanwhile, the prosecutor in the case is of the opinion that Stalker rejected any plea deals because he looked forward to seeing Woman at trial. And represented himself at trial so that he could actually speak with Woman during her testimony.

While it reportedly was not demonstrated that Stalker intended to harm Woman in any way, the jury found that Woman experienced reasonable fear and distress from Stalker’s conduct.

At this point, one can only speculate about what Stalker will do upon his release from confinement.

Read more in this [Syracuse NY] Post-Standard article: Convicted stalker sent to prison for re-stalking same Syracuse-area victim.

New York Wife receives monthly alimony of $850. This spousal support award is based, at least in part, upon an alleged disability that purportedly prevents Wife from working.

Husband, who is the one paying Wife the alimony, would, of course, prefer to be relieved of his burden. Husband keeps his eyes peeled for opportunities to put an end to it.

And then Husband finds …

Wife’s online blog. With photos of Wife belly dancing.

And entries to the effect that Wife belly dances – vigorously – several hours each and every day.

So, Husband files family court papers to modify his alimony obligation. Wife defends that her belly dancing is purely physical therapy.

But the New York family court sees things differently.

And reduces Wife’s permanent spousal support. To less than half the original amount. And to only two years’ duration.

And awards Husband his attorney’s fees from Wife.

And orders Wife to vacate and sell the marital home … and pay Husband sixty (60%) percent of the net proceeds of sale.

Subsequently, Wife reportedly asserts that she is merely “posing” in some posted photos and that she can and does only gentle stretches, not true belly dancing.

Medical evidence, or even evidence of legal “disability status”, are conspicuous by their apparent absence from the case.

If the ruling seems harsh, it appears that the divorce court concludes that Wife has misrepresented her disability to the court and, in doing so, has defrauded the court. And that doesn’t sit well with the court.

Read more in:

• this [Vero Beach, FL] Student Operated Press article: ‘Disabled’ Lady Posts Belly Dancing Pics Online, Judge Cuts Her Alimony In Half

• this [UK] Daily Mail article: ‘Disabled’ wife who lost alimony payments over belly dancing photos says she was only posing and

• this New York post article: ‘Disabled’ woman seeking alimony revealed to be belly dancer

April is National Child Abuse Prevention Month.

A good time to recall that “[y]ears of scientific studies have shown that research-based child abuse prevention programs can give struggling parents the tools they need to become self-aware, better-equipped, more patient parents.”

Especially when the child is very young and bonding and attachment are beginning.

Child abuse prevention programs build on parents’ strengths and teach them about normal child development, how to address challenges and how to manage stress from those challenges.

One veteran child welfare advocate asserts that these programs “break the cycle of abuse and neglect”.

Read more in this [South Florida] Sun Sentinel article: Efforts can slow child abuse cycle.

Husband and Wife are having a bitter – and lengthy – divorce. Going on five years now.

Husband was wealthy while the marriage was intact.

But claims to have suffered dramatic financial reversals … right around the time the divorce was filed. He asserts that he owes 28 million UK pounds to creditors.

Wife contends that Husband is actually hiding 2 billion UK pounds in assets, by re-routing them to overseas accounts and to trustworthy friends.

One such friend is said to have become wealthy only after associating with Husband. Now, the friend remains wealthy, while Husband is supposedly broke.

That friend has paid some monies to Wife to help her with her living expenses.

But Husband reportedly has not made one alimony payment to Wife since 2009, when ordered to do so. Husband is court ordered to pay Wife 27,500 UK pounds each month.

Husband’s former attorney suggests that 8 million UK pounds worth of the debts Husband is claiming are fraudulent and nonexistent.

The UK court’s ruling on this matter is anticipated … in October.

Read more in this UK Telegraph article: Growing riches of ‘penniless’ husband’s best friend.

Taxpayer receives a letter from Internal Revenue Service (IRS) advising that Taxpayer’s $4,000 tax refund, instead of being sent to Taxpayer, has been applied to his past due child support obligations. That happens through a process called interception.

Only this Taxpayer has no children. And, no children, no child support obligations. Current or past due.

These things happen.

And, apparently, happen again.

Twelve years ago, there was a different taxpayer who owed back child support. That taxpayer had a similar social security number to this Taxpayer’s.

And a child support services data entry clerk reportedly keyed in a single wrong numeral in that other taxpayer’s social security number. Thereby entering it as this Taxpayer’s exact social security number.

Causing this Taxpayer’s tax refund to be intercepted back then too. Although Taxpayer did get his refund that time, his social security number was never scrubbed from the “deadbeat parents’ database” of social security numbers.

Which is likely how this happened to this Taxpayer not once, but twice.

So far.

Read more in this WUSA TV 9 News Now article: Typo Trouble Costs Taxpayer Thousands.

Michigan Mother publicizes Son’s cancer to raise money.

Only Son doesn’t really have cancer.

Mother supports the illusion by shaving Son’s head … and drugging his food with powerful narcotic depressants.

Mother is arrested for fraud and child abuse.

Mother pleads no contest.

Mother is sentenced to one year’s imprisonment.

Son is placed in foster care.

Mother voluntarily gives up her parental rights to Son.

Son may now be adopted, although the legal process takes a year once an adoptive parent is inclined to adopt.

It is possible that Son may be adopted by extended family members.

April is Child Abuse Prevention Month.

Read more in this Detroit Free Press article: Macomb County mother who faked son’s cancer gives up parental rights and this Taylor [TX] Daily Press article: April is Child Abuse Prevention Month.

I’ve already posted a couple of times previously on a particularly drawn out and complex family court case that continues to take novel twists and turns, since its beginning in about 2003. See Vermont Holds It Has Exclusive Child Custody Jurisdiction over Child Raised by Lesbians and Interstate Child Custody / Visitation Dispute by Lesbian “Second Mother”.

To recap the lengthy history of this family court case, Birth Mom and Psych Mom are a gay couple living in a civil union in Vermont when they decide to have a child, Daughter, together. They break up when Birth Mom becomes an evangelical Christian and leaves Vermont and the gay lifestyle … and tries to cut Psych Mom out of Daughter’s life.

The dispute works its way through the family courts of Vermont and Virginia (Birth Mom’s new home) on appeals and, ultimately, it is agreed by both states that Vermont retains child custody jurisdiction of Daughter. The Vermont family court awards Birth Mom primary child custody of Daughter, but awards Psych Mom liberal child visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

Birth Mom consistently refuses to comply with the family court’s child timesharing orders … and, for that reason, loses legal custody of Daughter to Psych Mom. At which point Birth Mom allegedly absconds with Daughter to an uncertain location. A warrant for Birth Mom’s arrest issues.

Enter a Tennessee evangelical pastor (Pastor) who reportedly aids Birth Mom in flying Daughter to Nicaragua, where Pastor had been a missionary. Birth Mom and Daughter reportedly live in a beach house in Nicaragua, which is owned by a businessman whose daughter works at an evangelical university law school in Virginia – which represented Birth Mom in her Virginia family court case appeal.

In the latest twist, now Pastor is under arrest in Virginia on federal charges of international parental kidnapping, and is expected to be transported to Vermont to appear in federal court.

Additional arrests may follow.

Read more in this New York Times article: Pastor Is Accused of Helping to Kidnap Girl at Center of Lesbian Custody Fight.

Collaborative divorce doesn’t have as much buzz of late as it once did. But it still has its fans, and its good points.

For those who may be considering a collaborative divorce, some of those good points are listed below:

• Privacy. Any way you cut it, a lot less paper finds its way into the court file in a collaborative divorce (or any uncontested divorce, truth be told). That means less private information – and the proverbial outrageous allegations – are exposed in the publicly accessible court file.

• Control. In a collaborative divorce (or any uncontested divorce, truth be told), spouses do not give up decision-making authority to a judge. They agree on everything themselves. Granted, that means give and take and compromise, but they still have more choice and control than if a third party, like a judge or arbitrator, has an absolute right to impose their will on them.

• Not as emotion-driven. By its nature, collaborative divorce utilizes support professionals intended to keep the parties on speaking terms and on an even and focused keel. (Of course, people who choose this path tend not to be as predisposed toward “go for the jugular” hostilities and rages.) In traditional divorces, there are some spouses who would really benefit from intensive therapeutic support. But their attorney can only recommend this to them. An attorney can’t require it and the process doesn’t require it.

• Easier on the children. This, of course, is a good thing, and it’s true of most uncontested divorces. Although there certainly are exceptions, such as when it takes way too long to arrive at agreement or where there is an agreement but one of the spouses really “gets the shaft” or “takes the shaft” to spare the children the litigated divorce. Eventually, this has a way of backfiring.

• Cost effective. Truthfully, collaborative divorce may not save any money, it just tends to expend it differently. In fact, collaborative divorce may be more expensive in money terms than many conventional divorces. But if non-monetary costs are factored in, there may well be a savings.

Read more in this [Newtown PA] Patch article: Top Five Reasons to Divorce Collaboratively After Age 50.

Man has allegedly posted about 4,000 messages about Woman on the internet, all attacking her character and professional skill.

Man also allegedly publishes a blog impersonating Woman.

Man has allegedly posted obscene messages on Woman’s website.

Woman tries to press charges with police.

But Woman lives in New York … and Man lives in Singapore.

New York authorities maintain that they cannot doing anything because Man’s criminal acts are in Singapore.

Singaporean authorities don’t seem to care about what Man has reportedly done.

Stalking via the internet is growing more widespread but is not so widely punished, in part because the legal tools to do so have not evolved as rapidly.

Stalking reportedly inflicts severe stress on victims, on a par with post traumatic stress disorder and crashing in a plane.

Some activists are pressing for uniform laws against stalking across various international communities, such as the European Union.

In Florida, stalking is a crime. Victims of stalking may also obtain restraining orders of protection against stalkers, called:

1. injunctions for protection against domestic violence

2. injunctions for protection against repeat violence

3. injunctions for protection against dating violence and

4. injunctions for protection againstsexual violence.

Read more in this Economist article: Cyber-stalking – Creepy crawlies – The internet allows the malicious to menace their victims.

One common question clients ask is: am I better off to file first for the divorce?

The truth is, the law does not care which spouse files first. There is no inherent advantage or disadvantage to being the petitioner (or plaintiff) or the respondent (or defendant).

Knowing that a divorce is going to be filed and, even better, knowing precisely when it will be filed and served, imparts a huge advantage though. It facilitates pre-filing planning and action, of a time-sensitive variety.

For example, it can dramatically affect a dependent spouse’s ability to weather the divorce storm, stay the course and emerge a survivor … and better.

By the same token, it can dramatically affect some well-off spouses’ ability to execute a plan of what may be described as self-impoverishment, in their effort to minimize what they will have to pay out in child and spousal support as well as what property will be equitably distributed between the spouses.

In that vein, what follow are a few warnings to keep in mind if a divorce may be heading your way:

1. Joint accounts. Either spouse has the power to clean out joint accounts at any time. That doesn’t mean they ultimately get to keep everything that was in them without sharing with the other spouse. But awaiting ultimate justice can be tough on a needy spouse. By the same token, striking while the iron is hot and proactively accessing an equitable share of joint accounts can turn out to be a lifesaver for a needy spouse.

2. Joint debt (versus marital debt). Depending on a couple’s circumstances, it may be prudent to close or freeze joint debt accounts. Depending upon a spouse’s circumstances, it may be prudent for them to have credit card accounts in their sole name. It is usually prudent to keep an eye on the balances of any joint credit or debt accounts. Debt is a complex area because a spouse’s rights and obligations as to a creditor may be inconsistent with their rights and obligations as to the other spouse. The legal information provided in the cited article is not entirely correct under Florida law.

3. The Marital Home. Since it is generally not feasible or desirable for both spouses to remain in the marital home, the couple must decide whether one spouse should remain in it or whether it should be sold. This decision is complicated these days by whether what the couple owes on the home exceeds its current fair market value … and whether they are even able to afford their mortgage under current circumstances.

4. Buying a New Home. For spouses who are named on the marital home and mortgage, this can be problematic under the best of circumstances if the home is not sold or refinanced and the nonresident spouse released. If the marital home is under water or the couple is otherwise behind on the mortgage, renting is likely going to be the only option.

5. Managing Money. This is probably an essential survival skill, especially in these times. A spouse who has relied on their partner to handle this function will need to take over this function, fast. Failing to do so may jeopardize their future, even if they obtain an excellent property and support settlement or court award of property and support.

Read more in this Investopedia article syndicated in the San Francisco Chronicle: The Financial Risks Of Leaving Your Spouse.

Service men and women may receive what is called “retainer pay”. Not salary. Not pension.

In a divorce from someone who serves in the military, should retainer pay be considered a marital asset that the other spouse shares in?

That is the law across the nation.

In Oklahoma, legislators acted to change the law, but they were unsuccessful. And the proposed legislation must now be tabled … for two years.

Military spouses and former spouses objected to the proposed change in the law.

They argue that the entire family serves.

And must put up with frequent reassignments that make it difficult for the nonmilitary spouse to keep a nonmilitary job and build up their own retirement and other personal savings.

Read more in this [Oklahoma City] Oklahoman article: Oklahoma House panel kills bill that would prevent nonmilitary ex-spouses from getting retention pay.

Hidden assets can potentially skew a divorce settlement to disproportionately favor one spouse over the other.

In most states, divorce law requires a division of marital property that generally tends toward equality between spouses. (These laws may go by different names and may include various exceptions, of course.)

But a family court can’t distribute what it doesn’t know about. And a spouse can’t ask the court to distribute what he or she doesn’t know about.

There are procedures and professionals who specialize in investigating and ferreting out undisclosed assets. But they are not inexpensive.

Whenever possible, it makes financial sense for the in-the-dark-spouse to do as much investigation of their own as possible, before resorting to increasingly specialized procedures and then increasingly specialized professionals.

Sources of tipoffs include:

• the other spouse’s personal and business tax returns

• the other spouse’s personal and business financial statements

• statements for bank and brokerage accounts, including those the other spouse has set up in their children’s or other relatives’ names

• the other spouse’s personal and business loan and credit card statements, on their own behalf or on behalf of their business

• the other spouse’s overpayments to the Internal Revenue Service, on their own behalf or on behalf of their business

• the other spouse’s overpayments to creditors, on their own behalf or on behalf of their business

• the other spouse’s business books and ledgers

• the other spouse’s paid bills, personal and for their business

• the other spouse’s business’ payroll tax returns

• and so on

Transfers of large sums of money or, for that matter, even smaller sums on a recurring basis, without legitimate purpose, should be red flags for further investigation.

Read more in this [California] press release: Getting a Divorce? Watch Out for Hidden Assets

Australian Husband and Wife have two children.

Husband and Wife split up.

The Australian family court orders Husband to pay Wife $800 per week as temporary support, based upon their pre-separation standard of living.

Later, the Australian family court modifies the support award down to $300 per week.

Wife now seeks increased child support for Son and spousal support for herself. Wife claims that her weekly household expenses come to $1,800.

Among the expenses in Wife’s budget: $60 for their son’s meals at McDonalds over the course of one week.

Husband insists that he cannot afford more than $300 per week.

The Australian family court modifies the support award back up to the originally ordered $800 per week.

But maintains that Wife must adjust her children’s and her own lifestyles and expenses. Such as cutting back on Son’s McDonald’s spending.

Read more in this Australian Herald Sun news article: Mum claims for son’s $60 Maccas habit and this Australian MSN 9 TV news article: Woman bills ex for son’s $60pw ‘Macca’s habit’.

OK. It’s not romantic. But it’s still sound advice.

Finances and related matters are a subject to address before walking down the aisle. Or face greater risk of heading to divorce court.

One aspect of the conversation is how you will handle your finances after the “merger”, as a couple. Especially if you both relate to finances differently as individuals.

Don’t know how your fiance relates to finances? Then the conversation is definitely overdue.

Does one of you have debt? Does one of you own a business? Does one of you have an inheritance? Does one of you have children from a prior relationship? And so on.

If the answer to any of the above is yes, then there are questions for the couple’s finances during the marriage. And others in the event of a divorce.

The other aspect of the conversation is about what happens, financially speaking, in the event of a divorce – or in the event of the death of one spouse.

Statistics confirm marriage is not forever in many instances. Put another way, many marriages will end in divorce, if not sooner, then later.

And it is inevitable that, sooner or later, one spouse will die. Sometimes it doesn’t require the arrival of old age.

You can just wait and see how your lives will go … or you can jointly work out the financial details of divorce or survivorship now, comparatively inexpensively, without being in crisis mode – or anger mode.

This process may entail consulting with some experts before the wedding. And getting an extremely valuable education that many do not obtain until too late … after a death or after being served in a divorce case. With much regret that the education comes too late.

In some marriages, addressing finances may include working out a prenuptial agreement (prenup), sometimes referred to as an antenuptial agreement. This is particularly worthwhile in the following situations:

1. where either spouse has one or more children from a previous relationship

2. where either spouse owns part or all of an existing business

3. where either spouse already owns significant assets, such as real estate, stock or retirement accounts

4. where either spouse has received or anticipates receiving a significant inheritance and

5. where one spouse will be supporting the other while he or she finishes their education or professional training

Read more in this Buffalo [NY] News article: Make finances part of wedding plans.

Indiana Mother and Father have Daughter. And separate.

Father has no contact with Mother or Daughter for several years.

Mother receives public assistance for herself and Daughter.

Then Father goes to prison to begin serving a twenty year sentence for armed robbery.

Mother has not initiated any contact with Father and has never pursued child support from him. Similarly, Father has not initiated any contact with Mother or Daughter and has never pursued any relationship with Daughter.

The state files proceedings to recover child support and birth-related expenses from Father and insists upon Mother’s cooperation.

Father files for visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

The Indiana family court orders:

• that Mother provide Father with an annual two hour visitation with now eight year old Daughter every summer at the prison where Father is confined

• that Mother “encourage” Daughter to write to Father, and draw pictures and the like for him

• that Mother allow Daughter to receive communications and gifts from Father

Mother reportedly takes no action to comply with the family court order for timesharing and visitation.

Father files a motion for contempt to enforce the family court parenting order and to penalize (sanction) Mother for her alleged disobedience of the family court visitation order.

The family court holds Mother in contempt of the court’s order … but rules, in effect, that all will be foregiven if Mother promptly complies with the court’s timesharing order now.

Mother is also reportedly experiencing financial distress and, as a consequence, transportation challenges.

Mother apparently fails to comply with the family court parenting order.

The family court acts to enforce its order of contempt … and sentences Mother, Daughter’s only caregiver, to six months in jail.

Mother engages a family law attorney to defend her position and seek relief from the court’s contempt orders. Mother’s family law lawyer undertakes several different legal procedures, but Mother cannot afford to have her family law attorney see the measures all the way through.

As a result, Mother represents self (pro se) in court. And loses on all counts.

The family court credits Mother with time served and requires Mother to serve one additional weekend in jail. Provided that Mother complies with the family court’s visitation order.

The family court makes it clear that it is prepared to escalate enforcement measures if Mother does not comply.

Mother plans to do her time … and then to seek free legal assistance to fight the family court’s timesharing and visitation orders.

Read more in this [Fort Wayne, IN] WANE TV news article: Mother chooses jail over visitation.

New Zealand Husband’s and Wife’s long term marriage reportedly breaks down.

Wife reportedly plans to divorce Husband.

Husband is believed to have “eavesdropped” on text messages in Wife’s cell phone, and gotten wind of Wife’s intentions.

Husband allegedly murders Wife with a shotgun.

Husband apparently defends that he did not mean to hurt Wife. With his shotgun.

Husband is convicted of murdering Wife.

Husband is sentenced for murdering Wife.

11 years. $65,000 restitution to Wife’s parents and two children.

Critics of the sentence, who reportedly include numerically significant members of the New Zealand legal profession, are, quite vocally, predicting that a sentence so light virtually invites murder as a pragmatic alternative to divorce.

Meanwhile, domestic violence experts are speaking out to draw attention to the prudence of abuse victims:

1. not tipping off their abusers as to their intentions of leaving them and

2. having a solid plan for their children’s and their own safe escape from the relationship and the home, including important papers and personal items

It is believed that Wife’s family may also be considering a civil suit for additional damages from Husband and/or appealing Husband’s sentence.

Read more in this New Zealand Herald article: Meads sentence sets ‘dangerous precedent’.

It’s no secret that co-parenting breaks down in too many divorces and separations.

Just how bad is it?

Well, in the UK, it is being proposed that, as soon as a child is born, the parents’ education in proper co-parenting upon divorce and separation begin.

Parents would immediately be given a brochure about good co-parenting in the event of divorce or separation at the time of their child’s birth.

The theory seems to be that, if parents are indoctrinated long enough, it will stick no matter what.

It would be interesting to see whether that would bear out.

Mediation would be mandated in child custody cases. As it is here in Florida.

It is also being proposed there that grandparent visitation rights be legislated.

Other proposals in the UK include expediting the legal process in child welfare cases.

Read more in this UK Telegraph article: New parents should be handed divorce advice for their children.

Father is deceased.

Texas Mother allegedly drives in her car with her five year old Daughter.

Mother is arrested for driving while intoxicated. For the third time, reportedly.

Texas family court awards temporary custody of Daughter to Father’s sister (Aunt) in November of 2009.

Mother, who is on probation, is awarded visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

Eighteen months later, Mother now seeks custody of Daughter, asserting that she is much improved.

Certain issues in the case are on appeal.

The family court may terminate Aunt’s temporary custody.

Read more in this [San Antonio] KENS TV 5 news article: Mother with DWI convictions fights for custody of her child.

South Carolina Husband and Wife divorce.

The family court awards Wife permanent alimony and spousal support.

The family court also awards Wife a portion of Husband’s pension toward her share of equitable distribution and property division.

Some time after the divorce, Husband presses a modification action to terminate alimony or, at the least, reduce alimony.

Husband contends that there has been a substantial change in circumstances in that Husband (and Wife) are now receiving payouts from Husband’s pension. Husband argues that Wife’s alimony should be reduced dollar for dollar by the amount of the pension that she is now receiving.

The family court now rules that there is a substantial change of circumstances. And reduces, but does not terminate, the amount of alimony payable to Wife.

The family court also awards Wife her attorney’s fees in this modification proceeding.

Husband appeals the family court’s ruling on his modification case.

The appellate court holds that the alimony rulings made by the family court are within the family court’s exercise of discretion and affirms the family court’s rulings.

The appellate court also holds that the original property division award of the pension cannot be factored in to any modification, because the family court originally took it into account when it fashioned the original property division and alimony awards. Lastly, the appellate court upholds the award of attorney’s fees to Wife.

Read more in this [Orangeburg SC] Times and Democrat article: Court upholds divorce order.

Brazil has reportedly just adopted legislation that guarantees grandparents the right to visit their grandchildren in the event their parents divorce.

Brazil’s statute bucks the general trend in the US of curtailing grandparent visitation rights where the parents are fit parents.

One can only wonder whether this legislation is a reaction to the world-famous case of the New Jersey boy held in Brazil for five years, even after his mother’s death, before being released to his father. The grandparents recently sought to compel visitation with their grandchild … on their own terms … and lost.

Read more in this CBC News article: Brazil gives grandparents visitation right.

California Husband and Wife look forward to the birth of their Triplets.

Wife delivers the Triplets.

And then, allegedly as a result of medical malpractice, Wife is left severely brain damaged. Unable to eat. Speak. Or move.

One year later, Husband divorces Wife.

Husband discontinues bringing her Triplets to visit Wife.

And Husband goes to family court to attempt to terminate Wife’s parental rights to Triplets.

Termination of parental rights is generally reserved for parents who have abused or neglected their children. Or abandoned them … persistently … willfully … or grossly negligently.

Family court denies the termination of Wife’s parental rights to Triplets.

And awards Wife visitation with the Triplets…

A single annual in-person visitation of five days. With Husband present.

And a monthly internet video conference.

Wife is reportedly thrilled by the prospect of her five day timesharing with the Triplets.

Read more in this [Salt Lake City] Deseret News article: Disabled mother’s visitation cut to 5 days per year and this Los Angeles Times article: Abbie Dorn, severely disabled giving birth to triplets, wins the right to spend time with her children.

Generally, withdrawing money from an IRA or similar retirement account prematurely is costly, in taxes and penalties. But this is exactly what must often happen in a divorce.

Giving rise to special exceptions rendering retirement account transfers incident to a divorce free of taxes or penalties.

If an entire IRA account is going to be transferred, it is permissible to simply change the name on the account from the original spouse-owner to the other spouse.

For partial transfers of an account, the methodology is “direct transfer”. In a nutshell, the owner spouse instructs the trustee to transfer a specified amount of the account’s funds to a retirement account in the other spouse’s name.

The transfer must be in accordance with a divorce judgment, so timing is important.

Pensions are divided via a different procedure, which I posted about in
Floridians: Don’t Take Your QDROs for Granted If You Are Entitled to Share in Your Ex’s Pension..

Read more in this Fox Business news article: Moving IRA Assets Under Divorce Decree.

Greek Husband and Wife meet and, in time, marry.

They have two Children together, Daughter and Son.

The marriage breaks down for many reasons. Among them, Wife alleges that Husband beats Son and shares a bed with Daughter while he is naked.

A Greek family court awards Wife sole custody of Children, with restricted visitation and timesharing to Husband.

During one such visitation, Husband reportedly absconds with the Children and abducts them to the US.

Husband settles with the Children in a Greek community in Florida, in the Tampa area. Money is tight, and Husband is arrested for shoplifting.

Through a Greek reality television crime show show picked up in the Tampa area, Wife learns that Children are in Florida.

Wife initiates an application for the return of the Children to Greece under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Law enforcement authorities become aware that Husband is wanted in Greece.

A federal judge in Florida in time enters a pickup order for the Children and Wife is reunited with the Children.

Wife prevails in the Hague Convention hearing and the US court orders that the Children be returned to Wife’s care in Greece.

Wife and Children return to Greece.

Shortly thereafter, Wife is assaulted and Husband allegedly abducts the Children again. To an undetermined location.

Authorities do not expect that Husband will return to the US this time.

Read more in this St Petersburg Times article: Greek drama plays out in Florida

One and one-half year old marriage of Russian Husband and Wife breaks down.

Couple and their child have apparently divided their time between England and Russia.

English wives reportedly typically receive more generous equitable distributions of marital assets than Russian wives.

Husband races to file for divorce in Russia and Wife races to file in England.

Husband wins that race. Sort of.

The British Court of Appeal has held that Wife is entitled to an additional equitable distribution property division award in England, upholding an award of 3 million UK pounds plus legal fees.

Only Husband hasn’t paid, and hasn’t set foot back in England since the court ruled … for fear of arrest.

The ruling undoubtedly bolsters England’s reputation as the so-called “divorce capital of the world”, and its popularity with international wives.

Read more in this UK Daily Mail article: Race to divorce: Russian wife, 27, wins £2.8million payout after just 18 months of marriage in UK

In most married couples, one has a greater tendency than the other to run up debt. When the couple breaks up, the other spouse worries whether they will be liable for the debt their spouse incurred.

This probably sounds as though the answer should be clear and straightforward. But the question may be a little more complicated than it appears at first blush.

For example, is the debt account in the other spouse’s sole name? Or is it a joint account?

This is a key question. If the account is joint, it doesn’t matter which partner actually “spent” the debt.

All account debtors are liable … for the entire amount of the debt. The creditor can go after both debtors or choose the best prospect for recovery.

Now, that’s the story as to the third party creditor. Family court can’t limit the third party creditor’s legal rights.

But family court can order the big-spending spouse to pay off or reimburse the other spouse for all or part of the debt they incurred on their own.

That’s not the only issue either. Even if a debt is in only the other spouse’s name, if the debt is incurred to pay for basic family necessities (”necessaries”), the other spouse may be held liable for the debt as well.

A slightly different question is whether one spouse’s or both spouses’ “stuff” can be made to answer for the other spouse’s debt, regardless of whether, technically speaking, the other spouse is personally responsible for the debt. Unfortunately, the answer to this question varies from state to state and may also vary according to the type of “stuff” the spouses own.

Read more in this Colorado Springs [CO] Gazette article: Money & the Law: Spouse’s debt woes likely your woes, too .

Canadian Husband is convicted of rape and murder.

Husband and Wife are divorcing.

Wife seeks to seal records in their divorce, allegedly to protect her privacy.

Some of Husband’s alleged victims contend that Husband began fraudulently transferring assets to Wife shortly after his arrest to avoid anticipated payouts which may be ordered to them and other judgment creditors.

Media attorneys also oppose sealing of the records or court-ordered bans on publication.

The Canadian family court has ordered that a written agreement between Husband and Wife be disclosed to media attorneys only, until the family court’s ruling after a full hearing on the merits of sealing or prohibiting publication.

As in Florida, Canada reportedly has a strong policy favoring treating divorce court case files as public records and disfavoring sealing records or prohibiting publication.

Read more in this CBC News article: Williams’s wife wants divorce records sealed and this Ottawa Citizen article: Judge: Russell Williams’ wife must disclose contract transferring marital assets.

Husband thinks Wife is having an affair.

Husband allegedly murders Wife’s suspected paramour.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Husband injures family court judge presiding over Husband’s and Wife’s divorce.

Husband allegedly also injures Wife’s divorce attorney.

Husband is under arrest for first degree murder of the believed paramour and two counts of attempted murder for the family court judge and his Wife’s divorce lawyer.

Husband seeks legal representation in his criminal cases by a public defender.

Husband is, however, denied a public defender because he reportedly has over $200,000 in assets.

Read more in this [Columbus, IN] Republic article: Man accused in Colo. Springs slaying, wounding of judge, to get private attorneys.

A new University of Michigan study concludes that twenty-eight percent of American mothers with two or more children have them with different fathers.

The study has 4000 women as participants.

The study also reports a substantial variance based on ethnicity, with:

• African American mothers at fifty-nine percent

• Hispancics at thirty-five percent and

• caucasians twenty-two percent

Factors making it more likely that children in a family would have different fathers include:

1. not living with a man at the time of birth

2. low income

3. limited education

Despite that, multiple fathers for multiple children in a family is pervasive at all income and educational levels.

Further, the phenomenon is more common among divorcees than single mothers.

The study has not yet been published and peer-reviewed.

Read more in this Business Week article: Many Moms Have Kids With Different Dads, U.S. Study Finds.

It can be frustrating – and worse – waiting for – or trying to enforce – past due alimony (also known as spousal support) (or, for that matter, child support) obligations. Especially when months turn into years.

Well, a woman in India waited nearly thirty years. Not to collect her alimony, mind you.

Just to get her court order for spousal support.

It seems she was divorced in 1983. And, for whatever reason, failed to seek alimony or child support in the original divorce proceedings.

Then, years later, in 1995, she petitioned the Indian family court to award her alimony and spousal support.

It is unclear whether her original divorce proceedings reserved on the issue of alimony for some reason or addressed the issue of spousal support in any way at all.

The woman apparently took the position in her 1995 family court filing that she hadn’t known of her legal right to alimony and spousal support at the time of her original divorce.

Indian law, however, apparently allows for new alimony claims to be filed after the original divorce is concluded, provided the spouse filing the claim has not yet remarried.

But the woman’s spousal support claim took seventeen years to “process” through the Indian family court. Seventeen.

(Which undoubtedly makes most of us feel much better about the speed and efficiency of our courts here in Florida and throughout the US.)

But, although it took nearly forever, the Indian court did eventually reward the woman with both a court order for alimony and a court order for child support. (Their child has, of course, since become a legal adult.)

Needless to say, the woman’s ex-husband appealed the Indian family court’s alimony and child support rulings.

But the Indian appellate court upheld the lower court’s spousal support and child support awards to the woman.

It is unknown whether the woman’s ex-husband has been complying with his court-ordered support obligations pending the outcome of his appeal. He reportedly operates his own (likely cash) business … and so does his current spouse.

But the woman is certainly making progress.

Read more in this Indian Express Limited article: 28 yrs after divorce, woman gets alimony and this New Delhi Television article: Woman gets alimony 28 years after divorce.