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

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.

Forty-plus Girlfriend and Boyfriend get engaged to be married. It is the first marriage for both.

Girlfriend owns a business and has an investment portfolio. Boyfriend has significantly less assets than Girlfriend.

Girlfriend’s friends advise her to enter a prenuptial agreement, also known as a prenup, with Boyfriend.

Girlfriend wonders whether her friends are correct and she should have a prenup. Secondarily, she wonders how to broach the subject with Boyfriend.

Where either intended spouse owns a business prior to marriage, they should definitely consider a premarital agreement.

Experience teaches that you can never go wrong planning for and expecting the best … but preparing for the worst. Both from a business standpoint and personally, having a prenuptial agreement just makes good sense for a small business owner.

In the event a marriage doesn’t work out, a prenup will save both spouses money, time and heartache.

Without a prenup, a contentious divorce (sometimes even one that is not so contentious) can paralyze a business, erode its value, and even kill it.

In a nutshell, an antenuptial agreement can mean the difference between an uncontested divorce and a contentious divorce.

If someone must go through a divorce, an uncontested divorce is surely
preferable to a contentious one.

As for broaching the subject, spouses must be able to discuss everything with each other. A prenup is just one of those kinds of things.

Read more in this [MI] Observer and Eccentric article: Prenuptial agreement is always a good idea.

Husband and Wife are unhappy.

They decide to get a divorce.

Wife files first. Or Husband does.

They agree on everything, making theirs an uncontested divorce.

They’d both like to get it over with quickly, but …

They have to wait a year – and attend state-mandated marriage counseling.

This is the scenario some North Dakota Republicans are looking to legislate in North Dakota. To lower the divorce rate.

There would be an exception for victims of domestic violence, where allegations are substantiated.

Some North Dakotans think this scheme sounds heavy handed and oppressive.

Read more in this WDAY News 6 970 AM news article: ND Bill would require mandatory marriage counseling for those seeking a divorce.

There are many ways that parties and/or conscientious counsel can try to keep costs down in divorce cases in family court (among others). Unfortunately, the legal system often doesn’t make it easy.

And may punish you. Regrettably, economizing can turn out to be very expensive.

The above observations apply in countless situations in divorce courts (and others) throughout Florida, New York, New Jersey (these I can speak to from personal experience). Likely, the world.

Here’s yet another example that just caught my attention.

Husband and Wife are working toward an amicable, uncontested divorce.

They own a marital business.

Husband and Wife agree on a fair market value for the business of $60,000. It’s not clear how they arrive at that number.

But that number underlies their property division, marital settlement agreement and final judgment of divorce.

Several months later, Wife seeks to throw out all three.

She now asserts that the business was worth $172,000, rather than $60,000. A difference of $112,000, half of which, presumably, would be allocated to Wife.

How does Wife arrive at that $172,000 value?

Wife hires an appraiser to perform a limited, qualified valuation – after the fact.

What’s that?

In a nutshell, a limited, qualified appraisal is performed based on strictly limited documentation and inputs.

Why?

Such documentation and inputs are often within the sole control of one spouse, and often may only be obtained through what is called the discovery process in the divorce court case. (Less documentation and inputs requires less expert review and analysis.)

In amicable cases, discovery may be sharply curtailed to contain costs and because there is trust.

In adversarial, contested cases, even where full discovery is desired by the spouse with less knowledge of the finances, it may nonetheless be limited because of the cost in both legal fees and experts’ fees of pursuing it from a spouse who is fully committed to avoiding full disclosure and who likely has the resources to stonewall, dodge, delay, and otherwise drive up the cost and increase delay as much as possible.

In this particular case, it is likely that timely discovery was voluntarily limited. And then, after Wife’s window of opportunity closed (there are rules that bar going back after the fact to do what you could have and should have done at an earlier time), Wife realized she “got took”.

And, likely because of limited information as well as limited financial resources, all Wife could obtain at that point was a limited, qualified valuation. And that just wasn’t good enough to persuade a court to set aside a previously agreed upon valuation, however arrived at.

If Wife’s change of heart was right on, she took a beating in the divorce property division.

She certainly saved legal fees up front by not pursuing discovery timely. And she certainly saved experts’ fees by obtaining only a limited or qualified valuation.

Hopefully, Wife saved enough money in the original case to offset the loss of her half of the difference between the two valuations. (Of course, the qualified valuation may have been low too. That will never be known for certain now.)

Read more in this Business Valuation Resources LLC newsletter article: More problems using preliminary valuations in divorce

People contemplating divorce often ask at their initial divorce consultation how long it will take. Unfortunately, the answer generally is: It depends.

Every case is different. It is – rarely – possible to complete a divorce in about a month. Some cases take years. Most cases fall somewhere in between.

A California billionaire-Husband and Wife have been going through their divorce for … eight years. No, that’s not a typo.

That’s on the long side. But there are special circumstances.

In this particular case, Wife’s allegations against Husband range from death threats to illegal drug stashes accessible to their children in the marital home to cheating near the marital home.

Husband has also previously been on the receiving end of serious allegations by US attorneys pursuing criminal prosecutions.

So, the divorce has not been the most amicable. And some of the issues are sensitive. And the parties have three minor children.

In California – and Florida – divorce proceedings are not confidential. Although many participants in the process wish they were.

So Husband and Wife have actually agreed to keep certain things in their case quiet. And, to a degree, the court has approved. Along the way, numerous orders sealing particular documents or categories of documents were entered.

And, eventually, no less than the Los Angeles Times intervened in the case, in the hope of gaining greater access to sealed records in this “juicy” divorce case. And different judges rotated in and out of the case.

Sealing orders were variously entered, amended, and superseded, etc., etc. And Husband appealed.

But Husband’s appeal was unsuccessful. And more of the eight years’ worth of this divorce court case file is now accessible to the public, including the media.

Read more in this Forbes piece:Billionaire or Not: No Special Treatment.

Florida Mother and Father have four year old Son.

Mother and Father are divorcing without lawyers.

Just another uncontested divorce.

Mother moves to Utah.

Father alleges in court papers that Mother is unstable and abandoned Son.

But couple agree on a timesharing schedule where Son lives with Father during the school year and with Mother during summers.

Son arrives for summer timesharing with Mother within days of Mother and Father’s divorce being finalized.

Mother’s Boyfriend allegedly beats Son for days as Boyfriend’s wedding to Mother approaches.

Mother and Boyfriend reportedly lock Son in a bedroom and head off to their wedding.

Son dies on Sunday.

Boyfriend allegedly bashes Son’s face and teeth in with a hammer to make identification of Son’s body more difficult.

Boyfriend reportedly wraps Son’s body in plastic and buries it in a canyon in Utah.

Mother is said to have reported Son as missing.

Mother and Boyfriend are arrested on suspicion of aggravated murder, desecration of a corpse, felony child abuse and obstruction of justice.

Boyfriend has a history of criminal convictions for criminal mischief, disorderly conduct and possession of drugs.

Read more in this Seattle Times article: Formal charges expected in death of Utah boy

Husband and Wife have had a stormy relationship for some time.

Their lives are far removed from the legal system.

Their resources are modest.

They have a Toddler and an early Teen.

Wife decides to divorce. Wife hires a divorce attorney.

Husband does not.

Eventually, the Court orders mediation by a courthouse-employed Mediator, before trial.

Wife goes to mediation with her attorney.

Discussion turns to visitation and timesharing.

Wife states that Toddler should not be away from Wife overnight, in fact, not for very long at all.

Wife’s attorney agrees.

Mediator then agrees.

Wife’s attorney states that Court won’t “impose” visitation and timesharing on Teen.

Mediator agrees that Teen will just do what Teen wants, so there’s no point in addressing timesharing with Teen in a settlement agreement.

Husband looks slowly around the conference table.

They all agree, he thinks silently. I guess I should … have to … agree.

Husband’s head nods agreement, but Husband’s heart silently protests.

Mediation runs long, so no agreement is signed that day. Fortunately for Husband.

Here is the untold story at mediation …

Husband has always worked evenings. Wife has always worked days.

Husband is the one who wakens the children every morning and gets them into their daily routine.

Husband and Toddler shuttle Teen to school on weekdays.

Husband takes Toddler back home and remains with Toddler until Toddler and Husband leave to pick Teen up from school.

Husband is the one who interacts with Teen’s teachers at school on a routine basis.

No need for daycare for Toddler. Husband is with him.

Husband is the one who takes Teen and Toddler to the pediatrician, the dentist, shopping for clothing and supplies, etc.

Husband is the one who chauffeurs Teen and Toddler to their daily activities.

Husband is the one who does activities with Teen and Toddler on weekend days, while Wife works.

In other words, from Teen’s and Toddler’s perspectives, Husband has been the “at home” parent, doing all the things an “at home” parent generally does.

Had Husband signed an agreement reflecting what Wife, Wife’s attorney and even the Mediator seemed to favor, Husband would have fared much worse in the settlement than he almost certainly would have fared in court.

Yes, Husband might have saved a lot of money by settling as the other participants steered him, but he would have lost out on having any further real relationship with Teen and Toddler.

Husband would have gotten the shaft.

Unfortunately, mediation horror stories are recounted to me regularly by people trying to cope with the aftermath of entering a bad settlement.

Mediation can save spouses money, time and bad feeling. Read more about that aspect of mediation in this press release by a mediator: Mediation: Affordable Bridge from Marital Strife to Happy Life.

But that’s true only if you don’t get the shaft.

Don’t misunderstand. Bad outcomes don’t make mediation a bad tool.

But it does make mediation potentially very dangerous for the unwary and untrained.

Ways to improve the likelihood of a fair and reasonable settlement at mediation:

1. having an attorney of your own to represent you at mediation

2. if you absolutely can’t afford that, the next best thing is to have an attorney of your own review any proposed settlement agreement and advise you on it before you sign it – afterwards is too late

3. if you absolutely can’t afford even that, it’s still better than nothing to at least consult with an attorney about your rights prior to your mediation

Bottom line: do yourself a favor. Don’t get the shaft. In the long run, that will cost you – and perhaps your children – a lot … in both money and grief.

Once again, a New York State legislator has sponsored a bill to allow for no-fault divorce in New York.

New York is the only state that still doesn’t offer an option for a true no-fault divorce.

And even this latest incarnation of a no-fault divorce proposal in New York applies only to uncontested divorces, where the spouses agree upon a settlement.

New York’s current divorce law makes for unnecessarily contentious and expensive divorces. But, despite this, all past efforts to adopt no-fault divorce in New York have failed.

Read more in this New York State Bar Association press release: State Bar Association Commends State Senate Committee on Judiciary for Advancing No-Fault Divorce Legislation.

Under current Maryland law, couples reportedly have to live separately for a whole year in order to get an uncontested divorce. They also reportedly have to testify that they have not had sexual relations during that year.

A Maryland legislator believes that the requirement of having to live separately for a year makes getting a divorce more expensive than it has to be, than it should be.

And so he has proposed legislation that allows couples who live together, but abstain from having sex with each other for a year, to obtain a divorce. Less expensively.

The so-called proposed “Sex-Free Divorce” is not without critics. They point out that whether a couple has refrained from having intercourse for a year is not verifiable. And, arguably, this new divorce option may induce perjury and circumvention of the year-long statutory “waiting period”.

Still, the “no sex” divorce is not without precedent in the US.

Read more in this [Arlington, VA] WJLA News Channel 8 article: Maryland Lawmaker Proposes ‘Sex-Free’ Divorce.

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.

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.

I’ve previously posted, more than once, about mediation, a very common route to a Florida uncontested divorce, and collaborative law, a trendy, generally higher-end path to a Florida uncontested divorce.

A California attorney attaches yet another label to yet another path to an uncontested divorce: the cooperative divorce law approach.

What’s that?

Cooperative divorce is a variation of collaborative divorce. Collaborative divorce typically involves a sizable team of professionals.

This can add substantially to the cost of a Florida uncontested divorce … and in many cases is professional overkill.

Cooperative divorce seems to be a more cost-effective and practical alternative.

For one thing, the nonlawyer professionals (accountants / financial planners, mental health professionals, etc.) are not brought on to the team unless and until they are demonstrated to be needed. In many cases, all of them or some of them may not be.

Also, if, despite the best of intentions on both sides, it turns out that all or some of the issues in the case cannot be resolved amicably, the original lawyers may continue to represent both spouses in litigation. In the collaborative approach, if the case doesn’t settle, both parties must start over with new lawyers. That results in substantial additional expense and slows the process down.

Read more in this San Diego News Network Family Law blog post: The Most Basic of Family Court Proceedings–Divorce.

Many people are baffled by the divorce process. At their initial consultation, some people question – and even obsess – over the sequence and timeline of the legal steps in the Florida divorce process.

But the truth is, there’s more than one possible sequence of legal events on the road to a Florida divorce, even a Florida uncontested divorce. For example, a settlement may be reached at any point in time before a final judgment is rendered after a divorce trial. And a settlement is what converts a divorce into an uncontested divorce.

Of course, if settlement is in the cards, settling very late in the process is not optimal for the spouses. They would save considerable money and upset if they reached their settlement much earlier in the divorce process.

How early?

It always surprises people to learn that there is absolutely no reason why spouses can’t reach a settlement before they even officially start their formal Florida divorce case. That is one of the hallmarks of one approach to a Florida uncontested divorce, called collaborative divorce.

The Achilles’ heel of the trendy collaborative divorce approach, however, is that both parties must be in synch with one another in agreeing on having a divorce, being ready to sit down at a negotiating table and being committed to settling before a divorce case is filed.

Unfortunately, both spouses aren’t always able to get on the same page in those respects that soon. Some parties need to be served – and sometimes even to experience a certain amount of litigation – before they are ready to accept the fact of the divorce, let alone deal with what must be dealt with.

But until a divorce case is filed, one spouse cannot force the other spouse to sit down at the negotiating table. It can be a long wait until the other spouse sees the light.

Every couple is unique and therefore every divorce is unique. Rigid approaches, strict methodologies and trendy labels don’t necessarily fit.

If and when both spouses become receptive and ready for it, any divorce can become a Florida uncontested divorce. And it doesn’t necessarily have to be a costly or bitter process.

Nor do collaborative divorce evangelists have a monopoly on pursuing settlement prior to filing. And non-collaborative Florida uncontested divorces can save spouses as much – if not more – money than Florida collaborative divorces.

It is important to understand the dynamics of your divorce before adopting any particular approach to divorce.

Read more in this FOX TV 5 news article: Collaborative Divorce Can Save Money.

They’ve been around for a while. But they weren’t universally or wholeheartedly embraced. Parenting coordinators.

But that will likely be changing next month. Due to a new statute.

And the recently imposed requirement that a parenting plan be made in Florida divorces involving children and Florida paternity cases involving children of separating parents who were never married.

A Florida parenting plan is a detailed statement of how parenting responsibilities (decisionmaking, timesharing and support) will be allocated between the parents. More detailed than marital settlement agreements and paternity settlement agreements have commonly been in the past.

Many parents find it difficult to agree on all of the provisions in a complete Florida parenting plan … Leaving it to the court to work out the details of the parenting plan.

Enter the parenting coordinator.

After the parenting plan is entered by the court, many parents find it difficult to live by the plan. Conflict erupts at exchanges.

Again, enter the parenting coordinator.

A parenting coordinator works with parents outside the courtroom to amicably develop or implement a parenting plan without litigation, to arrive at a Florida uncontested divorce or uncontested paternity case.

Depending on the wording of the order of referral to parenting coordination, the parenting coordinator may make recommendations to the court, or may actually have limited authority to rule on and decide certain disputes between the parents.

But parenting coordinators’ primary focus is to help the parents work together to resolve parenting disputes on their own without conflict.

Read more in this press release: National Cooperative Parenting Center Responds to New Florida Legislation.

Obvious? Not so.

So many Florida residents think (or, anyway, say) they have a “simple uncontested divorce“, often adding “there’s really nothing to fight about”.

But that does not make a Florida divorce uncontested. Not even close.

There is one way – and only one way – that a Florida divorce becomes an uncontested Florida Divorce.

And that way is … both spouses must sign a marital settlement agreement that resolves the issues.

(OK, technically, there are two other ways. One, if the other spouse allows a default to be entered and to stand. Two, the other spouse signs an answer and waiver. Don’t count on either of those two things being more likely to happen.)

At a minimum, those issues include:

1. property division, technically called “equitable distribution” of marital assets and debts
2. alimony, technically called spousal support    

   and, if the spouses have children together,

3. parental responsibility (in the sense of decision-making authority) (the term custody is now obsolete in Florida)
4. timesharing (formerly known as “visitation”) and
5. child support.

The latter three matters must be spelled out more particularly in a “parenting plan“.

Don’t get me wrong. There can be many other issues too, large and small.

But the point is: if one spouse is unwilling to sign a marital settlement agreement (or the desired marital settlement agreement) resolving these issues then, with the two possible but very unusual exceptions cited above, the divorce is not uncontested.

No matter how much the other spouse would like it to be. No matter how unreasonable the refusal to sign may be.

Period. End of story.

So even though the divorce may be simple and there may not be anything to fight about, the only way that divorce will happen is after a trial.

Although they may not have much else in common, women get the financial shaft worldwide in divorce according to studies by the United Nations (UN).

The UN has a Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). A UN committee is reviewing its provisions regarding divorce as it impacts women economically.

In many countries, women are not legally allowed to accumulate property of their own and they don’t receive an equal share of marital property when they divorce.

As a result, divorce typically affects men very little from an economic standpoint, but women typically suffer significant loss of income and standard of living.

That is why the UN Committee plans to make recommendations intended to encourage alleviating the situation.

Although the recommendations will not be enforceable, it is hoped they will create a moral imperative.

In the US, where women are equal before the law, statistically, women often pursue uncontested divorces and waive valuable legal rights to escape domestic abuse, including economic abuse in the form of expensive litigation.

Read more in this Women’s eNews article: U.N. Tackles Universal Problem for Women: Divorce.

Contrary to what most people think, uncontested divorce doesn’t necessarily mean instant divorce or simple divorce.

In fact, it can often take quite a while before parties can come to agreement on all issues. And that is precisely what must happen before a divorce can be considered “uncontested”.

Even if a divorce is uncontested (which may simply mean that eventually it achieves uncontested status by virtue of reaching a settlement agreement), it still brings upheaval and change. But it should be less expensive and less acrimonious.

In addition to taking care of “legal business”, there are also financial affairs to untangle and take stock of, even in an uncontested divorce.

Consultation with a divorce financial analyst or other financial professional may be worthwhile step toward reaching a settlement … and toward preparing for the future as a single – or a single parent.

Read more in this Canadian Financial Post Magazine article: Family File.

In theory, everyone wants an uncontested divorce. In reality, that may not be so easy to achieve.

The most common means to an uncontested divorce is a process called mediation.

Here in Palm Beach County, Florida, mediation is mandatory before trial. Even in counties where mediation is not mandatory, court-ordered mediation is routine.

So what is mediation?

Mediation is a negotiation, facilitated by a neutral mediator with training in amicable dispute resolution.

Mediation can save spouses money and hostility, and allows them the flexibility to fashion an outcome where each spouse can be happy with at least part of it. After a trial, a judge dictates the outcome to both spouses.

Mediation is most effective and most likely to result in an uncontested divorce where both spouses are relatively reasonable and realistic as to the range of likely outcomes at a trial.

In some circumstances, such as where there is a history of domestic violence, mediation goes best by assigning the spouses to different rooms and having the mediator travel between them. Slower, but safer and less inflammatory.

Read more in this Pioneer Press – Vernon Hills [IL] Review article: Mediators offer alternative approach to divorce

A group of Michigan professionals are rallying around one particular path to an uncontested divorce. It’s called collaborative divorce.

In collaborative divorce, both spouses commit to pursuing an amicable resolution without the necessity of litigating.

Their methodology includes a team approach, with a lawyer for each spouse, mental health professionals, financial advisors, child experts, divorce coaches, etc.

A lot of folks. As many – or more – as in some litigated cases. But all unified in the goal of avoiding litigation.

Proponents of collaborative divorce maintain that it is less costly than other approaches to divorce.

One may reasonably question that premise, at least in certain cases, after considering the team roster.

But it definitely may be less emotionally costly and lead to better co-parenting relationships after the divorce.

The Michigan collaborative divorce group concedes that collaborative divorce may not be the best methodology in cases where there is a history of domestic violence, illness or mental health issues.

In reality, there are also other circumstances where collaborative divorce is likely not the most appropriate approach.

Collaborative divorce is certainly an approach worth considering under the right circumstances.

But collaborative divorce is just one approach to uncontested divorce in Florida and elsewhere. It is not the only approach to uncontested divorce.

If both spouses want to divorce amicably, without litigation, whether it is collaborative divorce or not, there is at least one approach to uncontested divorce that is right for them.

Read more in this Traverse City [MI] Record-Eagle article: Amicable Split: ‘Collaborative divorce’ offers fewer fights, costs.

Husband and Wife married twenty-seven years.

Husband, former CEO of corporation, convicted of accounting fraud.

Husband ordered to pay over $3 billion as restitution.

Divorce filed. Uncontested.

In divorce settlement, Husband sells home to Wife for $10.

Prosecutors seek to intervene, contending that Husband bought assets using fraudulently procured funds and Husband should not be able to shield them through a sham divorce.

This is the latest in a veritable rash of reportedly sham divorces that authorities or private corporations have sought to intervene in to preserve access to allegedly misappropriated assets.

Read more in this American Bar Association Journal article: Feds Intervene in Exec’s Divorce, Argue It’s a Ruse to Avoid $3.3B Restitution.

Oklahoma couple gets a divorce. Then divorce is, uh, canceled.

It was an uncontested divorce. That means the parties had agreed on everything.

Those are typically informal affairs, hurried along before the presiding judge.

In this instance, only one party, with counsel, appeared at the hearing, the pronouns contained in the papers misled or confused as to gender, and no one mentioned to the judge that the couple were lesbians.

Until a reporter called the judge.

Oklahoma law not only prohibits homosexual marriages in the state but also explicitly prohibits recognition of homosexual marriages legally performed elsewhere.

So, once the judge realized what he had done, he voided the divorce he had granted.

The parties actually appealed, but the voiding of the divorce was upheld.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court did however rule that the parties should have been afforded a hearing first – and remanded for that hearing to be held. Although it appears that it was doomed to be an exercise in futility.

Read more in

• this [Oklahoma City, OK] KTEN TV news article: Same-sex divorce ruling issued
• this World Net Daily article: ‘Divorce’ canceled after lesbian union proven fraudulent
• this Gay City News article: Voiding of Lesbian Divorce Upheld

It may not last, but collaborative divorce is slowly gaining traction. But it’s certainly not appropriate for many types of people and cases.

It is actually questionable whether collaborative divorce is less expensive than traditional divorce, but it is generally more harmonious.

But it has its critics.

The Colorado Bar Association has, in effect, banned collaborative divorce in Colorado, characterizing it as unethical. Why?

Because “every attorney has an obligation to fight for a client’s interests” and, under collaborative divorce, an attorney is required to drop out of the case if it can’t be settled. Reaching settlement sometimes requires one party to accept an unfair deal.

Other critics point out that the friendlier-divorce model may facilitate fraud and deception by a spouse, since there is no judge to referee and impose order.

Of course, in the end, it’s really about the priorities of the parties in the case at hand. For some clients, peace and harmony are more important than pursuing everything they are entitled to financially.

Read more in this Washington Times article: Rise of collaborative divorce is not for everyone.

CBS’s Early Show has been airing a series called Reconcilable Differences. It’s focus is on helping the kids through a divorce.

The series explores settling cases amicably utilizing tools such as mediation, collaborative divorce, divorce coaching and education on parenting for divorce.

Of course, the most important rules are not to put the kids in the middle and to make sure they understand they are not to blame.

Nothing new here, except the medium and format. But this medium has a wide reach.

For those who missed the series, videos of excerpts can be viewed over the internet.

For more information, read this CBS News Early Show article: Reconcilable Differences, Part 3: Respecting And Guiding Kids Through A Divorce.

Despite rumors of change on the horizon, New York state still hasn’t adopted “no fault divorce”.

But, despite the seeming inconsistencies, the chief judge has announced a planned collaborative family law center. Its goal: faster, cheaper, friendlier divorces.

There is even anticipated to be free legal services for participants who can’t afford attorneys of their own. That would represent a new variation of collaborative family law.

Under current New York law, however, divorcing parties are still facing a long haul, first through collaborative family law efforts to reach an agreement, then through a year of separation under the agreement reached.

Read more in this New York Times article: Chief Judge Plans Center to Ease Divorce Process.

First there was “have it your way…”.

Now, at least in Arizona, there’s “do it when it’s convenient for you…”. Appearing in family court, that is.

As of 2007, some Phoenix area family courts will be open evenings and weekends, conducting all regular court business, including hearings and trials. Some area juvenile courts will also be open.

The extra hours of operation were reportedly added in response to “customer” requests.

This is probably an idea whose time has come. There are many modest income, unrepresented parties with simple, amicable, uncontested divorces who can’t exit their marriage without going through the courts but still can’t afford to miss work or delegate child or parent care responsibilities.

Read more in this Arizona Capitol Times article: Juvenile, Family courts to hold night, Saturday sessions.

There’s a fairly new “movement” gaining favor among divorce professionals. It’s called collaborative divorce.

The core premise behind collaborative divorce is to avoid court at all costs. To do that, the divorcing parties hire a team of professionals representing several disciplines, including law, therapy and finances / taxes. The team’s job is to facilitate reaching a fair agreement on all issues.

Collaborative divorce is touted as being smoother and less expensive than traditional approaches to divorce.

Collaborative divorce is an excellent approach for many divorcing couples. But, at risk of being a naysayer, collaborative divorce may not be a good alternative in some situations.

As one example, if a couple is well along the path to a fair settlement agreement before a single professional is hired, the collaborative divorce approach may turn their divorce into a large group project that may end up costing the divorcing couple a lot more time and money than it may have otherwise.

At the other end of the spectrum, collaborative divorce may fail halfway there, where one spouse is abusive, controlling, manipulative, dishonest, secretive, unyielding, etc.

If the collaborative process does break down along the way, the couple will have to “fire” the collaborative team, eat the expenses already incurred and start all over from scratch with brand new lawyers. Again, the divorce may end up costing the divorcing couple a lot more time and more money than it may have otherwise.

It’s easy for divorcing couples (and divorce professionals) to get caught up in the latest, greatest fad and jump on the bandwagon – in some cases to the point of rejecting any other approach out of hand.

Collaborative divorce may be right for you. Or it may not.

Before making a binding, exclusive commitment to any single approach, it makes sense to make your decision informed by a) your intimate knowledge of yourself and your spouse and your family as well as b) input from eclectic professionals or professionals who are open to whatever approach will best serve your interests in your circumstances.