California family law Archives - Page 2 of 5 - Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri

Mom and Dad Have Something to Tell You: Talking to Kids about Divorce

June 8, 2015/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

With forty to fifty percent of married couples proceeding in marriage dissolution, thousands of children experience the stress of divorce each year. While the adults are navigating their own emotions, children are also struggling with their own feelings. Many of these children get lost in the process as their parents often find it difficult to talk to them about divorce.

When parents decide to break the news to their children, it is important to leave any feelings of anger or blame out. Practicing the conversation may be helpful as to release any feelings of anger before talking with them. If possible, parents should also break the news together to avoid confusion. Telling children together also helps to preserve the child’s sense of trust in both parents.

The conversation should also be age appropriate. In other words, “[t]he discussion should fit the child’s age, maturity, and temperament.” It should also always include the following message: “What happened is between mom and dad and is not the child’s fault.” It is imperative to include this message as most children will feel that they are to blame for the separation, when this may be far from reality.

It is also vital to be prepared to handle children’s reactions to the news. For the children who become upset, parents can let them know that they care about these feelings and reassure them that their feelings are understandable. Some children may not react immediately. For these children, parents can let them know that this is also okay and that they will be there for them when they are ready to talk.

While there is no easy way for parents to break the news to their children, there are important things that both parents can do to help guide their children through this challenging time. The following is a list of helpful tips:

· Be truthful and discuss changes with your children.

· For younger children, have a simple and to-the-point conversation.

· Remember to keep legal talk, heated discussions, and visible conflict away from the children.

· It is important to keep each parent involved in the children’s lives.

· Try to minimize any disruptions in their daily routines.

· Restrict negative talk to private therapy sessions or conversations with friends outside of the home.

· Encourage children to share their feelings.

· Remind your children how much you love them.

· Most importantly, support your child as he or she is navigating through the process.

The Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you have any questions about helping your children through this process, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further 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.

Source: http://kidshealth.org/parent/positive/talk/help_child_divorce.html

Source: http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/social-affairs/20150530/the-ins-and-outs-of-talking-to-kids-about-divorce

Source: http://www.babycenter.com/0_how-to-tell-your-child-youre-getting-divorced_3657051.bc

Surviving The Holidays During A Divorce

December 3, 2014/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

The holidays are a time for family, friends, and togetherness. For the recently divorced or those in the process of a divorce, the holidays can be a very sad, confusing, and lonely time; especially for those couples with children. Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri, LLP have put together three tips to get you through the holidays this year: plan ahead, socialize, and create new traditions.

Plan Ahead

The first and most important step to ensuring you survive the holidays is planning ahead. This includes planning out where your children will spend their holidays and with whom. Depending on your custody plan, there are inevitably going to be holes in your schedule and during those time, loneliness may be unavoidable. One way to avoid being lonely during these times is to get activities on the calendar. If your children will be with your former spouse this year, plan activities with friends and family to keep you busy. While keeping yourself busy may be essential to surviving the holidays, it is also essential to leave some time for rest and reflection, so try not to over commit yourself.

Socialize

The more the merrier. It is common knowledge that the more people you surround yourself with, the better your mood will be. Just because your children are with your former spouse, does not mean you have to spend the holidays home alone. This holiday season, be sure to interact with others, whether it be with family or friends. Socializing will help you avoid feelings of sadness, loneliness, and depression. If you used to spend your holidays with your in-laws, find somewhere else to go this year. Do not be afraid to crash a holiday party or two. And remember, it is normal to feel out of place and uncomfortable, but the more you socialize, the better you will feel.

Create New Traditions

Divorce means letting go. This includes letting go of certain family traditions. Now that you are divorced, your holiday traditions are bound to change. This is your opportunity to keep the traditions you enjoy, get rid of those you do not, and create new and better traditions with your children. Take this time to try something you have always wanted to do, were too scared to do, or something your former would never let you and the children do. Also, if your children are spending this holiday with your former spouse, consider celebrating the same holiday with your children on an alternate day.

These are just some of the many tips available to survive the holidays during your divorce. The Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you are interested in learning more about scheduling where your children will spend the holidays, please contact Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information. Keep in mind 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.

Who gets the family pet in a divorce?

October 27, 2014/in Estate Planning, Family Law /by David Patton

If I had to ask you to put a price on your dog, cat or your pet hermit crab, could you? For some, perhaps they could but the vast majority would likely agree that their pets are priceless. However, disputes regarding who gets the family pet in divorce proceedings has become commonplace in family law.

Earlier this year, Melanie Griffith and Antonio Banderas made a statement that they were ending their two-decade marriage but vowed to remain friends and to move forward lovingly. However, shortly after, reports surfaced that a custody battle was flaring up – not over their 17 year old daughter, but over the couple’s three dogs.

Although these days some people treat their pets better than their own children, in the eyes of the law pets are still only considered the property of their owners, much like their furniture is[1]. Legal experts agree that pet owners invest hundreds sometimes thousands of dollars and hours researching proper training, good food choices, and the perfect toys, groomers and veterinarians for their pets. Those same individuals might also take precautions with their estate by writing a prenuptial agreement. But how often do those pet owners think about legal issues associated with pet ownership?

Family law attorneys agree that the best way to handle a situation with a pet is to put it in a prenup. If you came into your relationship with Maxwell, put it in writing that if you are to leave the relationship Maxwell is coming with you. If you and your significant other purchased a pet together during the relationship, but you both agree that one of you should have the pet in the event of a breakup, a post-nuptial agreement would make sure that in the event of a divorce or separation the pet would go with the spouse more bonded with the animal.

Without something in writing, trouble could land you arguing in court. Last year a New York judge granted a divorcing couple the right to engage in oral arguments over pet custody for the first time in the state’s judicial history. The landmark legal showdown was ultimately averted. The couple settled out of court.

In the event of a heated breakup, pets can be protected. If a party feels that he/she and the pet is in danger at the hands of the other party, California law provides for the family pet to be included on a protective order. Since 2008, courts have had the ability to make an order that the restrained person stay away from the pet. Family Code Section 6320 provides that upon a showing of good cause, the court may include in a protective order a grant of the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the spouse or minor child resident in the residence.

Family Code section 6320 makes strides toward addressing the established connection between animal abuse and family violence commonly referred to as the “Link.”[2] One of the first studies that described this Link found that of a survey of women with pets who had entered a shelter in northern Utah, seventy-one percent reported that their partner had threatened or actually hurt or killed one or more of their pets.[3]Another study of fifty of the largest shelters in the United States found that eighty-five percent of battered women and sixty-three percent of children with pets had experienced incidents of pet abuse.[4] An alarming consequence of these studies is that victims may feel that they cannot leave their abuser because they worry for the safety of their pets.

The Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you are interested in learning more about prenuptial or post-nuptial agreements, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further 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.

[1] Kimes v. Grosser (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1556

[2] Am. Humane Ass’n, Learn About the Link, http://www.americanhumane.org/site/PageServer?pagename=lk_about (last visited Aug. 4, 2007); see also Senate Judiciary Committee, Committee Analysis of SB 353, at 2-5 (Mar. 27, 2007) (explaining the connection between animal abuse and family violence). There are also several studies that report that children who witness abuse, or are abused themselves, tend to, in turn, abuse animals. See Phil Arkow & Tracy Coppola, Expanding Protective Orders to Include Companion Animals 5 (2007), http://www.americanhumane.org/site/DocServer/PetsinPO2007.pdf? docID=5061 (describing the harmful effects upon children of witnessing domestic violence).

[3] Frank R. Ascione, Battered Women’s Reports of Their Partners’ and Their Children’s Cruelty to Animals, 1 J. Emotional Abuse 119, 125 (1998).

[4] Frank R. Ascione et al., The Abuse of Animals and Domestic Violence: A National Survey of Shelters for Women Who are Battered, 5 Soc’y & Animals 205, 211-12 tbl.1 (1997), available at http:// www.syeta.org/sa/sa5.3/Ascione.html.

The Ways to End Your Marriage

August 8, 2014/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

In California, a marriage is dissolved by (1) the death of a spouse, (2) a final judgment of divorce, or (3) an annulment. Alternatively, if spouses do not want to completely end their marriage but do want to terminate their marital rights, they can (4) file for legal separation. Here is a look into each one:

(1) Death of a Spouse

When a spouse dies, dissolution occurs automatically, as a matter of law. This can be significant in family law proceedings if the spouse dies after divorce proceedings have begun, but before a final judgment of dissolution. In this scenario, spousal status is not officially terminated and the surviving spouse will still be considered “married” for inheritance purposes. Additionally, any pending dissolution proceeding is rendered moot at the death of a spouse and the court has no power to hear any remaining unresolved issues.

(2) Divorce

Divorce is the proceeding that legally ends the marriage or domestic partnership. Under Family Code section 2310, the grounds for divorce may be either “irreconcilable differences” or “incurable insanity.” Most marriages are dissolved on the ground of “irreconcilable differences.” A dissolution granted on the grounds of “incurable insanity” requires evidence – including competent medical or psychiatric testimony – that your spouse is incurably insane. In fact, this ground is so uncommon that there are no known reported decisions defining “incurable insanity” in the dissolution context. Further, it offers no tactical advantage so even if your spouse is incurably insane, pleading irreconcilable differences is much easier.

The determination of whether “irreconcilable differences” exist is essentially a ministerial function and is rarely a matter of contention. California is a no-fault divorce state, which means that any evidence of specific acts of misconduct (such as cheating, gambling, or heavy drinking) is improper. Courts recognize that ending a marriage is an intensely personal decision and only need to be convinced that the marital differences are substantial. Thus, direct proof of objective reasons supporting the divorce is not required.

(3) Annulment

An annulment declares the marriage was not legally valid – it was never entered into – and like other defenses to contracts, an annulment can occur if one party was not of sound-mind at the time of the marriage or if the marriage was procured by fraud.

A famous example of an annulment due to lack of capacity is Ms. Britney Spears’ 55-hour marriage to her high school friend, Jason Alexander, in Las Vegas. Ms. Spears sought an annulment stating that she “lacked understanding of her actions to the extent that she was incapable of agreeing to the marriage because she and Alexander did not know each other’s likes and dislikes, each other’s desires to have or not have children, and each other’s desires as to State of residency.” In other words, she was drunk and this was a joke that went too far.

Marriages can be annulled for fraud, if the fraud relates to a matter that California deems vital to the marriage relationship and the fraud directly affects the purpose of the party deceived entering the marital contract. Usually, annulments based on fraud involve the sexual and procreative aspects of marriage, such as a secret intention not to live with the other spouse or a concealment of sterility. False representations about earning capacity, wealth, or social status are not the type of fraud that will warrant a nullity. Nor will a failure to fulfill wedding vows or commonly understood spousal obligations, such as being a loving and supporting partner.

(4) Legal Separation

The grounds for legal separation are the same as those for a divorce but it does not end the marriage. Legal separation is an alternative to divorce, where the spouses do not want to completely sever the legal status of the marriage. Otherwise, a legal separation operates similarly to a divorce, separating all finances and property.

Spouses often seek a legal separation for religious or other personal reasons, or to retain eligibility for medical insurance, veteran’s benefits, or social security benefits that would have otherwise been lost by a divorce.

If you have any questions about the proper way to end your marriage, please contact our California Certified Family Law Specialists. Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex family law proceeds and offer a free consultation.

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.

Tax and Estate Planning for Same-Sex Couples

August 1, 2014/in Estate Planning, In the Community, Probate /by David Patton

Earlier this week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit struck down Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban, saying that withholding the fundamental right to marry from same-sex couples is a form of segregation that the Constitution cannot tolerate.

In June 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States in United States v. Windsor, held that the federal government must recognize same-sex marriages and that it is up to state Legislatures to define marriage within state boundaries. Since then, numerous law-suits challenging the constitutionality of state DOMAs on equal protection and due process grounds have prevailed in various federal and state courts. Currently, 19 states, including California, plus the District of Columbia recognize same-sex marriage (recognition states), while 40 states prohibit it (non-recognition states).

The prevailing prediction is that a Supreme Court guarantee of a right to marriage is on its way. American support for same-sex marriage is at a new high of 55 percent, and California support is at 61 percent and increasing, if the trends continue. It is important for all couples to create an estate plan. Additionally, it is important for same-sex couples to be aware of the potentially complicated issues that arise when they move across state lines.

Same-Sex Couples Living in California

Same-sex married couples now living in California enjoy the same benefits and burdens under state and federal law as married opposite-sex couples. Before Windsor and IRS Revenue Ruling 2013-17 (which extended federal tax benefits to married same-sex couples, regardless of their state of residency), many married opposite-sex couples likely took this preferential treatment for granted.

Some of these benefits include:

Property transferred between spouses incident to a divorce is not subject to income or gift tax;
Spousal support (alimony) payments are tax deductible to the paying spouse;
Child support payments are not subject to income tax;
Spouses receive a community interest in 401(k) accounts and other retirement plans; and
Spouses receive all community property and anywhere from one-third to all of the deceased spouse’s separate property for intestate (when a person dies without a will or other non-probate instrument) inheritance purposes.

All couples should be aware of their legal rights at marriage, divorce, and death. It is important for both same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples to consider pre-marital agreements, estate plans, and any tax consequences that arise from marriage or divorce.

The Marital Status of Migrating Same-Sex Couples

When a same-sex couple moves out of California, their marital status will depend on the other state’s law with regards to various issues including, state tax filing status, intestate succession, guardianship and conservatorship appointments, and adoption and artificial reproductive technologies. In other words, a non-recognition state may not recognize the otherwise valid same-sex marriage.

If and when the Supreme Court guarantees a right to marriage, moving across state lines will no longer be an issue for same-sex couples. However, in the interim, it is important to be aware of the possible legal consequences.

For example, under Florida law, the definition of “heir” does not include same-sex spouses for intestate inheritance purposes. This means that a same-sex couple that was married in California, but permanently living in Florida, will not inherit from each other under the Florida intestate system. Some courts in non-recognition states are willing to recognize same-sex marriage in certain contexts through the doctrine of comity, which is where a court gives deference to another state’s laws. However, most surviving spouses want to avoid litigation because it can be a headache, requiring time, money, and mental energy.

In some cases, it might be worthwhile for same-sex spouses to opt out of the intestate system with non-probate instruments, such as estate plans. A same-sex couple’s estate plan needs to be drafted with precision, specifically naming beneficiaries, rather than using general terms such as “spouse.” This becomes especially important if a same-sex couple moves to a non-recognition state, where the court may not interpret a same-sex spouse to qualify as a spouse or heir. If any other blood related heirs of the deceased spouse were to contest the non-probate instrument, they could end up inheriting property that would have gone to the same-sex spouse in California or another recognition state.

If you are a same-sex couple and are considering marriage, or need to create or update an estate plan, please contact our California Certified Family Law Specialists. Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex family law and estate planning matters and offer a free consultation.

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.

“No good marriage ever ended in divorce” – Louis C.K.

July 30, 2014/in Family Law /by Gina Policastri

“Divorce is always good news. I know that sounds weird, but it’s true because no good marriage has ever ended in divorce. That would be sad. If two people were married and they just had a great thing … and then they got divorced, that would be really sad. But that has happened zero times.”

-Louis C.K.

This inevitably leads to the question: what is a “good” marriage? Likely, the answer is there are no good or bad marriages. Instead there are a range of risk factors associated with divorce. When two people get married, they usually aren’t thinking that the marriage will end in divorce. But then hard times arise and sometimes they find themselves thinking either casually or seriously about divorce. Is there a way to know if your marriage is statistically likely to end in divorce? Below, we will take a look at some of the most common risk factors in the United States.

Current state of divorce

In the United States, researchers estimate that 40 to 50 percent of all first marriages will end in divorce or permanent separation. The risk of divorce is even higher for second marriages at about 60 percent. Divorce has always been present in American society although it has become more common in the last 50 years. Surprisingly, the highest divorce rates ever recorded were in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Since then the divorce rate has actually decreased a little but still remains at a historically high rate.

Researchers have found that individuals considering divorce make their decision to stay or leave based on the rewards they gain from the marriage, the barriers against leaving the marriage, their perceptions about finding a better relationship, and the amount of investment they have made in their marriage.

Barriers to leaving a marriage, such as concerns about money and the effects of family breakup on their children, can keep marriages together in the short term. However, unless there is improvement in the relationship, eventually the barriers are usually not enough to keep a marriage together in the long run.

What factors are associated with a higher risk for divorce?

The statistics which show that almost half of all marriages end in divorce might make it seem like staying married has the same odds as roulette – namely 50/50. However, research has identified various factors that are associated with a higher risk for divorce. Some couples may have a low risk and others might have a higher risk of divorcing. Understanding these factors may not directly help improve your marriage or make a decision about getting divorced, but they may help couples understand why they’re facing challenges. Researchers have identified the most common factors as:

Young Age. Marrying at a young age increases your likelihood of divorce, especially in the early years of marriage. People who married in their teens are at dramatically higher risk for divorce than those who married as early as age 21 or 22.
Less education. Researchers estimate that individuals who have some college education as opposed to not finishing high school have a lower chance of divorce. Investing in an education is a good way to build a foundation for a better marriage, not just a better job.
Less income. Tied to education is income. Research has estimated that individuals with incomes exceeding $50,000 have a lower chance of divorce. Finances can be stressful and having at least a modest income can help couples avoid stresses that can lead to divorce. If you argue with your spouse about finances once a week, your marriage is 30 percent more likely to end in divorce than if you argue less frequently about finances.
Premarital childbearing and pregnancy. In America, more than one-third (37%) of children are born to parents who are not married, and few of these parents eventually marry. Most of those parents will separate before the child begins school, some will never really get together.
If you have a daughter, you’re 5% more likely to divorce. This figure multiplies with the number of daughters. Researchers believe that this happens because fathers are more invested in family life when they have boys.
If you or your partner have had a previous marriage. Data shows that second (or third or fourth) marriages should be more successful than first marriages. However, this statistic is skewed by serial marriages and researchers have been unable to take the Elizabeth Taylors out of the equation.
Parents’ divorce. Of course, some risk factors for divorce you can’t control. If you experienced the divorce of your parents, unfortunately, that doubles your risk for divorce. If your spouse witnessed their parents’ divorce, then your risk more than triples. This does not doom your marriage to failure but rather suggests that individuals who experienced the divorce of their parents need to work harder to make good marriage choices and to keep their marriage strong and happy.
Same-sex marriages are more likely to end in divorce. Although the LGBT community is just starting to have legally recognized marriages in the United States, a research team led by Stockholm University on legal partnerships in Norway and Sweden found that male same-sex marriages are 50 percent more likely to end in divorce than a heterosexual marriage. If you’re a female in a same-sex marriage, this figure soars to 167 percent.

These are only a few risk factors that researchers have identified and none of them represent automatic doom for a marriage. However, if a number of these and other risk factors are present, seeking pre-marital or other counseling may be recommended, even if nothing seems wrong at the moment. Much like roulette, one can increase the odds in their favor by learning more about marriage, themselves and their partners.

If divorce seems inevitable, it is also recommended that couples take time to try to fix the relationship through counseling or some other professional service before making the decision to call it quits. However, we understand that sometimes there are no alternatives besides divorce.

If you are considering divorce or have questions about divorce planning, please contact our California Certified Family Law Specialists (as certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization). Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex family law proceedings and offer a free consultation.

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 detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Halle Berry Owes $16,000 a Month in Child Support: How Much is Too Much?

July 10, 2014/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Halle Berry’s last breakup came with a price tag: $16,000 a month for the next 13 years.

On May 30, a Los Angeles court ordered that the Academy Award-winning actress must pay $16,000 a month in child support to her ex-boyfriend, Gabriel Aubry, to support their 6-year-old daughter, Nahla, until she turns 19 or graduates from high school. This amounts to $192,000 a year and almost $2.5 million of nontaxable income over Nahla’s childhood (not including another $115,000 Halle must pay retroactively, plus $300,000 to cover Aubry’s legal fees).

The pricey child support settlement raises the question: Does a 6-year-old really require $16,000 a month?

In California, child support is calculated using a uniform statewide guideline formula that considers both parents’ income, if one parent makes more money than the other, the amount of time each parent spends with the child, and a variety of other related factors. The guideline formula is presumed to be correct and courts should only depart from the guideline in rare circumstances. Under Family Code section 4057(b)(3), one of these circumstances is when “the parent being ordered to pay child support has an extraordinarily high income and the amount determined under the formula would exceed the needs of the children.”

Determining what exceeds a child’s needs is subjective, can be tricky, and involves somewhat circular reasoning. The ability of support must be suitable to the child’s circumstances and can depend on whether the parent is merely wealthy, such as a senior engineer at Google making $300,000 per year, or extremely wealthy, such as Halle Berry, who has a net worth of $70 million and earns approximately $16 million per year. For example, in Marriage of Chandler, based on the Husband’s monthly income of $117,000, the trial court reduced the guideline amount of $9,000 to $3,000 to reflect the child’s reasonable needs. The appellate court then reversed, finding that reducing support to one-third of the guideline was erroneous, and that $3,000 would not come close to providing the child with the lifestyle she was used to.

In Marriage of Bonds, which involved the baseball player Barry Bonds, the trial court awarded his ex-wife $20,000 per month in child support. Bond’s pre-tax salary was $8 million per year and the guideline child support would have been $67,000 per month. His ex-wife appealed, claiming that $20,000 only covered “bare necessities.” The appellate court dismissed ex-wife’s argument, stating that the trial court has discretion to order whatever amount it decides will meet the reasonable needs of the children, consistent with the basic principles behind child support.

The court in Marriage of Catalano noted that a child is an innocent victim of a divorce, with no choice in the breakup, but with reason to expect that both parents will continue to provide for him or her in whatever manner they can. Indeed, the Legislature has expressly provided that children should share the same standard of living as both parents, and child support may be used “appropriately” to improve the standard of living in the custodial household to “improve the lives of the children.” Thus, the parent receiving child support from a high-income earner may derive some personal benefit from the extra cash. With Halle forking out $16,000 a month, Nahla will likely continue to live a comfortable life while Gabriel benefits personally from some extra cash, as well.

If you are a high-income earner and are concerned about making excessive child support payments, please contact our California Certified Family Law Specialists. Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex family law matters and offer a free consultation.

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.

The Indian Child Welfare Act: Child Custody and Adoption Issues Hit The Supreme Court

June 13, 2013/in Family Law /by Gretchen Boger

Family law cases, albeit important, are almost never heard by the U.S. Supreme Court because the Tenth Amendment typically leaves family matters to the states. However, a recent custody clash over an adorable Native American girl has found its way to our nation’s highest court, giving the Justices an opportunity to scrutinize the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). The law was put in place to protect the one-third of Native American families who were losing their children to white foster and adoptive parents. However, as you will see, this 35-year-old law and its sweeping effects may be out of place in today’s modern society.

At the heart of the current dispute is a three-year-old girl who is the product of a relationship between a Cherokee Indian man and a Hispanic woman. The couple was previously engaged but, when the couple broke up before the child’s birth, the father let the pregnant woman know that he was relinquishing all of his parental rights. The child was born, put up for adoption, and spent two years with her adoptive parents until a South Carolina Court ordered that the girl be returned to her biological father. Apparently, the child’s father only intended to relinquish his parental rights to the Mother—not to an adoptive family—and he objected to the adoption four months after the adoption took place.

The little girl’s adoptive family is devastated, and rightfully so. If the state of South Carolina was permitted to apply its standard child custody procedures, and the “best interest of the child” standard adopted by many states including California, the biological father would have had no rights whatsoever and the little girl could have remained with the parents who raised her from infancy. Nevertheless, in the United States, the U.S. Constitution and Federal Statutes enacted by Congress are the supreme law of the land and completely trump any state laws that come into conflict. Justice Kennedy noted, “What we have here is a question of a federal statute which…displaces the ordinary best interest [of the child] determinations of the state courts.”

The Supreme Court will deliver its opinion on this case later this month. In all likelihood, the effects of the decision will reach not only families interested in domestic adoption, but will also touch on the bigger question that asks who is best-suited to handle family law matters or determine parenthood—the states and their family courts or the federal government? We should have an answer soon.

As you can see, even simple family law matters like adoption can quickly become complicated. If you have any questions relating to adoption or any other family law issue, please contact the certified Family Law Specialists (as certified by The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization) at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri. Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex family law matters and would be happy to meet with you for a free consultation.

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.

Modification of Spousal Support: The Duty to Become Self-Supporting

September 24, 2012/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

To modify a spousal support order, the moving party must show a material change of circumstances since the last order, even if the parties stipulated to the prior order. A recent case, In re Marriage of Khera and Sameer, addressed if a party’s unrealized expectation that she would become self-supporting as of the spousal support order’s specified termination date could be a basis to modify the order and extend the term of spousal support.

In Khera and Sameer, the parties’ spousal support order provided for termination of spousal support on a specific date unless, before that time, the ex-wife brought a motion to modify for good cause. At the time that the parties entered into the agreement, Wife was not working but the parties anticipated that she would be working as a social worker and able to support herself by the termination date.

Wife filed a post-judgment motion to modify the spousal support order and extend the duration of support. She argued that there was a change of circumstances in the form of “unrealized expectations” regarding her ability to support herself. She alleged that the parties’ expectation that she would be employed as a social worker making $42,000 annually was not realized as she was making approximately $700 per month at the time she filed for modification.

On appeal, the court noted that a material change of circumstances could be in the form of unrealized expectations, but circumstances accounted for in the prior order cannot constitute a change of circumstances.

The court stated that so long as the supported spouse has made reasonable efforts to become self-supporting, a change of circumstances may be in the form of unrealized expectations in the ability of the supported spouse to become self-supporting within a reasonable period of time. Ex-wife needed to make a showing that, “despite her reasonable efforts, she was unable to support herself” in order for her unrealized expectation of self-support to constitute a change of circumstances. Wife’s declaration did not show that she diligently acted to achieve financial self-sufficiency or that despite her reasonable efforts, she was unable to obtain to obtain full time work. Rather, Wife made a voluntary decision to pursue a doctoral degree rather than finishing her MSW degree and going to work full-time. The court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s finding that the evidence was insufficient to show a material change in circumstances and refusal to modify the judgment to extend spousal support.**

The certified Family Law Specialists as certified by The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you find yourself on either side of a spousal support modification, contact Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further 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 detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

*In re Marriage of Khera and Sameer (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 1467.

**The court considered other issues in determining whether there was a material change in circumstances since the last order, such as Wife’s debt and disparity in income between the ex-spouses, and the marital standard of living; however, we are focusing on the duty to become self-supporting. Please read the case to understand the breadth of the issues and reasoning of the court’s decision.

Grounds for Divorce in California

July 5, 2012/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Part One of a blogging series covering legal issues presented in the Cruise and Holmes divorce.

In the midst of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes’ divorce, you might be wondering what the grounds are to file for divorce. No, Katie Holmes cannot cite “Dislike for Scientology” or “We’re Just Friends” as a basis for relief.

In California, a divorce can be sought only on the grounds of irreconcilable differences or incurable insanity. California is considered a “no-fault” state. The irreconcilable differences ground is purposely broad. It is intended to represent the actual reasons underlying marital breakdowns and at the same time make irrelevant questions of fault or misconduct by either party.*

Holmes filed for divorce in New York** citing a “no-fault” cause of action called “irretrievable breakdown.” In addition, New York recognizes six other grounds for divorce. As a result of citing “irretrievable breakdown,” neither Cruise nor Holmes can play the “blame game.” It will be interesting to see how the case unfolds and whether or not the parties are able to reach agreements to keep the case out of court and out of the spotlight as much as possible.

The Certified Family Law Specialists*** at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you find yourself on either side of a divorce case, contact the Certified Family Law Specialists*** at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further 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 detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

* See Marriage of Walton (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 108, 119.

** Venue, aka proper county for trial, will be featured in Part Two of the blog series next week.

*** Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

Posts

Mom and Dad Have Something to Tell You: Talking to Kids about Divorce

Surviving The Holidays During A Divorce

Who gets the family pet in a divorce?

The Ways to End Your Marriage

Tax and Estate Planning for Same-Sex Couples

“No good marriage ever ended in divorce” – Louis C.K.

Halle Berry Owes $16,000 a Month in Child Support: How Much is Too Much?

The Indian Child Welfare Act: Child Custody and Adoption Issues Hit The Supreme Court

Modification of Spousal Support: The Duty to Become Self-Supporting

Grounds for Divorce in California

Free 30-Minute Family Law or Estate Planning Consultation

Contact Us