Family Law Archives - Page 32 of 35 - Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri

An Overview of California’s Supervised Visitation Law

January 12, 2011/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

Supervised visitation is judicial order for a neutral third party to be present when a child is spending time with his/her parent. When making a supervised visitation order, a judge may consider a wide variety of factors and goals. Some of the reasons a judge may order supervised visitation include giving the parent time to deal with specific issues, helping reintroduce a parent to a child after a long absence, introducing the parent to the child when there has been no prior relationship, avoiding potential domestic abuse or neglect, or if there is a threat of abduction.

If you think that supervised visitation may be in your child’s best interest, please contact the well-informed child custody lawyers at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for more information. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

What Happens to Out-of-State Real Property Upon a Divorce in California?

January 11, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Upon a divorce, it is often a complicated and challenging process to divide real property existing in another state. The correct treatment of an out of state home or piece of land depends on how the property is characterized under California community property law. Generally, most property acquired during marriage is considered community property. At divorce, community property is divided equally between spouses. However, property acquired during marriage while living in a non-community property state is not community property. To find out what happens to this out of state real property, it is best to look at an example.

Let’s assume you and your spouse meet, marry, and reside in non-community property state. While married, you purchase a home with the savings you both earned during your marriage. Now, let’s assume, your spouse gets a job in California and you relocated without selling your home. Years later, you file for divorce. Under California law, this property is not community property as it was not acquired in a community property state. Instead, this property is characterized as “quasi-community property.”

Quasi-community property is property (wherever located) that would have been community property if the spouses had acquired it while domiciled in California. In a California divorce proceeding, quasi-community property will be treated the same as community property. Thus, in the above example, the out of state home would be divided the same way as if it were located in California. If located in California, the home would have been considered community property as it was acquired during marriage with martial earnings. It is important to remember that California community property law is complex, and it is filled with numerous exceptions.

For more information on how your property would be characterized under California law, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

“He Wants What?!” – The Basics of California Community Property Law

January 6, 2011/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

Did you just find out that your husband or wife wants ownership of a special piece of personal property or real estate that you acquired before you were married? If so, you should be aware of some basic rules in California family law.

First, California is a community property state. This means that all property acquired by spouses during marriage while living in California is presumed to be community property. However, property that is acquired during marriage by gift, bequest, or devise, or income from property acquired prior to marriage is presumed to be separate property of the receiving spouse. In addition, all property acquired by each spouse prior to marriage is presumptively the property of the owner spouse. Thus, if your spouse is currently twisting your arm to give you possession of a valuable asset you acquired before marriage, your spouse may not have any legal claim to this property.

However, under certain circumstances, your spouse may have a claim in your separate property. For example, if you owned a home before marriage but community funds were used during the marriage to pay down the mortgage, the community may have an interest in the home. In addition, if you purchased real estate or personal property during marriage with your separate property but agreed with your spouse in writing that you were converting this property into community property; your spouse may also have an interest in the asset.

For more information on California community property law, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Celebrity Engagements Remind Couples of the Importance of the Prenup

December 30, 2010/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Over the past year, numerous celebrity couples have stepped forward with plans to marry. In early November 2010, Nick Lachey announced he was engaged to his longtime girlfriend, Vanessa Minnillo. The couple had been dating for approximately four years prior to the engagement. Shortly after Nick announced his soon-to-be marriage, news of Jessica Simpson’s (Lachey’s ex-wife) engagement surfaced. Unlike the long courtship of her ex-husband, Simpson had only been dating her now-fiancé, NFL player Eric Johnson, for five and a half months prior to the engagement. Additionally, Kelsey Grammer, who is not yet divorced from his third wife, announced plans to wed his fourth, Kayte Walsh. With all of the buzz around celebrity engagements and divorces, one can only hope that these pop culture icons will enter into prenuptial agreements to protect their sizable assets.

Jessica Simpson has allegedly learned a valuable lesson involving the dangers of marrying without a prenuptial agreement. Simpson’s decision not to sign a prenuptial agreement with Lachey reportedly cost her around $10 million. Rumors in early December 2010 show that Jessica has learned her lesson and will “definitely” have a prenuptial agreement prior to marrying Johnson.

Unlike Simpson, Grammer does not appear to have learned the importance of the prenup. Grammer’s soon-to-be ex-wife, Camille Donatacci, has just recently rejected Grammer’s offer to settle their case for around $30 million. Because Donatacci and Grammer did not enter into a prenuptial agreement prior to marriage, Donataci appears to be holding out for at least $50 million in addition to child and spousal support. According to Perez Hilton’s blog, an insider close to the couple shares that Grammer is “deeply in love” with Kayte Walsh would not “insult her by asking her to sign a prenup.”

As divorce rates rise, family law attorneys recommend that engaged couples consider entering into prenuptial agreements prior to marriage. Prenuptial agreements are especially recommended if either party has significant assets or owns real estate. For more information on California prenuptial agreements, please visit our website. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Sources:

http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/how_camille_got_more_M6sGhLN4M07esaEQP6AKaJ

http://perezhilton.com/2010-12-30-kelsey-grammer-not-getting-prenup-for-third-marriage

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/dailydish/detail?entry_id=76889

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/19/inside-jessica-simpsons-e_n_786165.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/15/joe-simpson-reacts-to-jes_n_783508.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2010/12/09/2010-12-09_jessica_simpson_will_have_a_prenup_with_eric_johnson_report.html

What is Domestic Violence? How You Can Get an Emergency Protective Order

December 30, 2010/in Family Law /by David Patton

Note: People can tell what internet sites you have visited on your computer. Be safe, and use the internet at a local library, friend’s house, or at work!

Domestic violence is not just physical violence. It includes spoken, written, emotional, and physical abuse. It includes hair pulling, sexual assault, breaking into the victim’s home, stealing the victim’s property, etc. A verbal threat of physical violence or a pattern of harassing behavior is also considered domestic violence. Domestic violence is never acceptable, and it is also known as “abuse.”

In order to constitute domestic violence, the abuser and the victim must have a close relationship (i.e. married, divorced, separated, dating or dating in the past) or be related (i.e. parent, child, etc). Domestic violence is not only damaging to the victim, but it is destructive to children living in the home as well.

If you are in danger, ask a police officer to request an “emergency protective order.” You can ask for this order at any time – day or night. An emergency protective order only lasts for five court days or seven calendar days. Thus, before the emergency protective order expires it is highly suggested to seek a longer-term restraining order by filing the papers in family court.

If you need emergency shelter, or help with a restraining order, you can contact any of these local Santa Clara County resources:

For North County, call Support Network
24-hour crisis hotline (800) 572-2782
For Central County, call Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence
24-hour crisis hotline (408) 279-2962
For East San Jose, call Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence
24-hour crisis hotline (408) 279-2962
For South County, call the Community Solutions Women’s Shelter
24-hour crisis hotline (408) 683-4118
For help county-wide, call the Asian Women’s Home (AACI – Asian Americans for Community Involvement) Domestic Violence Program 24-hour crisis hotline (408) 975-2739
In Fremont, call SAVE (Shelter Against Violent Environments)
24 hour crisis hotline 510-794-6055
For Santa Cruz, call Women’s Crisis Support 831-477-4244, both English and Spanish.

For more information on how to protect yourself, or to proceed with a divorce, please contact our family law attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Visitation Rights May be Affected by One Parent’s Decision to Move Out of the Area

December 17, 2010/in Family Law /by David Patton

Parental custody and visitation can be a contentious issue in divorce proceedings. In general, the court will grant the noncustodial parent reasonable visitation rights unless it is shown that visitation would be detrimental to the child. Whether you have visitation rights or primary custody of your children, you should be aware of the implication a change in residence may have on your responsibilities to your children and your ex-spouse.

For example, if you have primary custody of the children and live near your ex-spouse and you decide to move away with your children, your responsibility for ensuring your ex-partner continues to have reasonable visitation rights will increase. The court has broad discretion to modify visitation orders to lessen the impact of the loss of contact with the non-custodial parent in these situations. For example, the court may choose to increase visitation rights for the non-custodial parent during school vacations. The court could choose to allocate the financial burden for paying for the children’s travel costs to you. The court could also deny the custodial parent the right to move at all.

However, let’s assume you have primary custody and your ex-spouse decides to move out of the area. In this case, the court may decide to modify the visitation schedule to provide for longer, but less frequent, visitation periods.

If you are interested in learning more about California custody and visitation, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Sperm Donor Parental Status in California

December 17, 2010/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

As artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization technology continues to rapidly develop, California law has been struggling to keep up with the times. Specifically, it is becoming increasingly important to protect the rights of mothers who conceive using donor sperm.

To date, the California Family Code has partially addressed this issue. The Family Code provides that a donor who has provided semen to a sperm bank, or to a licensed physician for insemination of a woman, is treated by the law as if he were not the natural father of the child conceived as a result. A recent news story illustrates the importance of the continued development of family law in relation to sperm and egg donation and usage.

Karen B., a writer in Los Angeles, California was looking for a sperm donor to help her start her family. She met the man who would become her sperm donor, Daniel C., on Craiglist after first seeking a donor among her group of close friends. Initially, they agreed that she would retain custody and would make all the parenting decisions while the donor would have visitation privileges. However, after Karen already became pregnant, Daniel began forcing himself into Karen’s life and sought custody rights. The court ruled in favor of Karen’s parental rights, but granted Daniel with twice monthly visitation privileges. However, because of this informal arrangement, Karen lives in fear that Daniel might someday abduct the child to his native Brazil. For the full article see ABC news.

As this particular story illustrates, it is important that California family law continue to develop to protect the parental status, custody, and visitation rights of parents and donors who enter into agreements to conceive a child. In addition, it is of utmost importance that the law continues to expand to serve the primary function of ensuring the safety, stability, and mental health of the child.

For more information about sperm donor rights, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Father Connected to 23 Children Sent to Prison in Child Support Case

December 16, 2010/in Family Law /by David Patton

A few months back, a man from western Michigan was sent to prison for failing to pay child support. He is alleged to have fathered around 23 children with 14 different women, and owed $533,000 in child support. The mother of two of the children said that it was heartbreaking to have to choose between shoes and rent. Over a period of seven years, she has received less than $90 from the children’s father. For more information please see the full article.

If you are having trouble collecting, or paying, your child support you are certainly not alone. If you have a court order for child support and have been having trouble collecting payments, you can ask the court to help enforce the order. One option is an earnings assignment order. If the court issues an earnings assignment order, the other parent’s employer will be ordered to withhold child support payments from his or her check and send them directly to you.

For more information on how to collect your child support judgment, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Royal Engagement Illustrates the Importance of Consulting a Qualified Attorney before Marriage

December 10, 2010/in Family Law /by Michael Lonich

Prince William recently announced that he and his long-time girlfriend, Kate Middleton, are engaged. The couple met nearly eight years ago while attending the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. The prince decided to propose to Middleton while on a vacation in Kenya, and he surprised her with his mother’s sapphire and diamond engagement ring.

With the announcement of the engagement, the legal field has been buzzing with discussion on whether or not the royal couple will enter into a prenuptial agreement prior to marriage. While prenuptial agreements were previously not valid in the United Kingdom, a landmark case settled earlier this year has paved the way for the prenup’s validity in England.

Prenuptial agreements have been enforceable in California for decades. In fact, a prenuptial agreement is a very effective tool for couples thinking about getting married but wishing to protect their assets. When drafted properly, these documents can help couples decide issues relating to rights and responsibilities during marriage and the division of assets upon a subsequent divorce. However, it is essential that a California prenuptial agreement be drafted by an experienced, licensed attorney to ensure it will be enforceable down the road.

For more information on prenuptial agreements, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Sources:

ABA Journal

ABC News

Less Costly Divorce Alternatives Exist in California

December 10, 2010/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

A study that came out earlier this year reported a decline in the number of divorces occurring during the recession. In 2005, the divorce rate was 17.3 percent. This number sank to 16.4 in 2009. Yet, depending on how you interpret the results, this could be both good and bad news. The good news is that there are fewer divorces which may mean that some couples may be finding ways to work through rough patches. However, the bad news is that this could also mean that couples who are badly in need of a divorce are not seeking them due to financial strain. For the article discussing the study, please click here.

Do you feel stuck in a dead-end marriage but can’t afford to get out? If so, you have many options available to you. First, it is likely a good idea to seek the advice of a qualified family law attorney. Your lawyer can help you figure out what is the best way to meet your goals. For example, your lawyer may suggest you try divorce mediation. Divorce mediation is a process of divorcing where a neutral third party helps the couple divide assets and make decisions regarding custody and other issues. Your attorney may suggest divorce mediation if the divorce has been a mutual decision and if both parties have no desire to reconcile.

If divorce mediation is not an option, your attorney may suggest filing for a legal separation. A legal separation does not legally end your marriage. Rather, it allows you and your spouse to live separately and make sole decisions about money, property, and parenting issues.

For more information about more affordable divorce alternatives please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.