These days, lots of people reportedly spend lots of time on so-called social networking sites.

What are they up to there?

Well, it seems a respectable percentage may be engaging in virtual flirtations … and beyond.

A British divorce website initiated a study of recent American divorces or, more specifically, court-filed papers in US divorce cases.

Well, the study concluded that a rather astonishing twenty (20%) percent of such court filings specifically refer to the social networking website known as “Facebook” as a cause of the breakdown in the marriage!

The study encompasses 5,000 divorce cases in the US.

And, although Facebook is the leading reported offender among social networking websites, other social networking websites, including Twitter and MySpace, are not overlooked in court filings either.

The study does not go so far as to attribute any divorces to Facebook (or Twitter or MySpace).

The study also puts out there that divorce attorneys may scour social networking websites looking for “dirt” on opposing parties (which may be useful) … and on their own clients (for damage control purposes).

A divorce lawyer’s work is never done.

Read more in this [Philadelphia] ABC TV 6 news article: Study: Facebook often leads to divorce.

Ex-Husband and Ex-Wife are divorced.

Ex-Husband was ordered to pay Ex-Wife alimony in the divorce.

Ex-Husband is in arrears to the tune of $70,000.

Not because of illness or disability or unemployment.

Ex-Husband actually owns several successful businesses and holds roughly one hundred patents.

He’s comfortable.

But Ex-Husband contends that Ex-Wife breached their settlement agreement, in which he agreed to pay Ex-Wife alimony, by abandoning their sons thirty years ago.

And so Ex-Husband refuses to pay the alimony arrearages, out of principle.

Ex-Husband is eighty years old and their divorce took place thirty-eight years ago.

None of the above caused a Georgia judge to hesitate before ordering Ex-Husband to jail.

Read more in this [Jacksonville] Florida Times-Union article: South Georgia man went to jail out of ‘principle’.

Michigan Husband and Wife have two children together.

Husband is a podiatrist.

Husband works long hours and travels a good bit.

Wife is in counseling over marriage-related issues.

Wife’s therapist suggest that she do some “digging” on Husband, using the internet and phone records.

Wife agrees.

And is shocked by what she finds.

Husband was already married to another woman in another state when he married Wife. They were never legally divorced before his marriage to Wife.

Wife knows Husband as a Protestant.

Wife discovers Husband has secretly converted to the Muslim faith .. and adopted an Arabic name. Husband has also traveled to the Middle East twice on spiritual journeys.

Oh, and Husband married another woman subsequent to his marriage to her … in an Islamic wedding ceremony in Canada.

Husband’s position is that he thought he was divorced from his first wife when he married Wife, and that his third marriage was not formalized but only enacted to spare the bride from having to go through with an arranged marriage against her will.

Wife seeks an annulment.

And this is one of the relatively unusual grounds that would support an annulment in lieu of a divorce, at least under Florida’s law pertaining to annulment.

Read more in this USA Today article by way of the Detroit Free Press: Michigan woman’s Google search turns up husband’s 2 other wives.

Husband and Wife are divorcing, and each is vying for custody of their Sons.

Sons go to counseling with Counselor, a therapist.

Counselor and her husband (Corroborator), also a therapist, have offices in the same practice and suite.

Counselor testified in the custody trial that Husband yelled at Counselor in rage.

Corroborator also testified in the custody trial, backing up Counselor’s testimony.

It turns out that Husband secretly recorded his conversation with Counselor.

No yelling on the recording.

As a result, Counselor and Corroborator stand trial for perjury.

The family court judge presiding over the custody trial testified against Counselor and Corroborator at their criminal trial!

Yet Corroborator’s patient, presumably a neutral, disinterested third party witness, also testified that Husband was loud in Counselor’s office.

It is unclear whether the recording could have been incomplete or, as Corroborator contends, not legitimate at all.

Jury is hung and mistrial is declared because jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict.

Technically, the state can try Counselor and Corroborator again, but the likelihood is diminished.

Read more in this Lufkin [Texas] Daily News article: Counselor takes stand to defend self in perjury trial and this Lufkin [Texas] Daily News article: Judge declares mistrial in perjury case.

California Husband and Wife have two year old and four year old Daughters.

Wife, an attorney, accuses Husband of molesting their older Daughter.

Husband denies the allegation.

Wife files for divorce.

California authorities do not pursue a criminal case against Husband.

Wife and Daughters and maternal Grandmother move from Southern California to Texas.

Wife again seeks prosecution of Husband for the alleged molestation of Daughters.

Husband’s attorney indicates that no experts back up Wife’s allegations against Husband. (Which, if true, is not conclusive.)

California trial court orders Mother to bring Daughters back to California – and indicates that the court plans to award temporary custody of Daughters to Husband’s Sister.

Rather than relinquishing Daughters to Husband’s family and placing them at risk of contact with Husband, either Mother or Grandmother shoots Daughters to death and then shoots the other adult before turning the gun on herself. All are killed.

Although both women have gunshot powder residue on their hands, the weapon is registered to Grandmother and investigators conclude that Grandmother was probably the shooter.

Read more in this Los Angeles KABC-TV 7 news article: Custody dispute suspected in Clemente murders and this Wall Street Journal posting: Investigators: Grandmother Pulled Trigger in Howrey Associate Slaying.

Father allegedly owes $37,000 in child support arrears.

Father has the distinction of owning a motorized bar stool.

Father reportedly drives around town, intoxicated, with the bar stool in his car – and is involved in an accident.

As a result, Father is convicted of DUI.

Father then tries to sell his motorized bar stool on eBay, hoping to cash in on its relative notoriety.

Father receives a bid over $1,000 … but the bidder doesn’t follow through and make the payment.

Child support enforcement doesn’t think an auction is such a bad idea for collection purposes though.

The agency seizes Father’s bar stool with the intention of auctioning it off locally, offline, itself.

But was the Agency premature in giving up on eBay?

Read more in this Columbus Dispatch article: Bidder reneges on motorized bar stool eBay offer.