California Divorce and Family Law

Can Economy Also be Blamed for More Divorces?

Do tough economic times put extra strain on marriage? The experts say 'yes.'

While therapists and counselors say business is up thanks to our sagging economy, some divorce attornies say their phones have also been ringing with a lot of questions.

So, how are things going here in Arkansas? The Natural State already has one of the highest divorce rates in the country, only Nevada is higher on the list.

A North Little Rock attorney we spoke with says while things are usually quiet in his office the month of December, Arkansans are bucking the trend this year. Boasting one of the highest marriage rates in the country, people in Arkansas are obviously eager to "have and to hold for better or for worse."

But unfortunately, some Arkansans aren't sticking to the "as long as we both shall live" part of the deal.

The divorce rate in the United States is 3.6 out of every thousand people. But in Arkansas, that number jumps to 6.1.

Attorney Sam Hilburn says divorce proceedings are never easy, and he's been busier than usual in recent past.

"Generally during the month of December, because of Christmas, people are more reluctant to initiate or begin a divorce, and this particular year I haven't seen much fall off from that or any hesitation to go ahead and file for divorce,” Hilburn says.

Hilburn says the sluggish economy and the troubles that come along with it could be to blame for marital discord.

Obviously, money causes all kinds of stress, but with the housing market in the tank and people losing jobs, marriage could be more fragile than usual.

From ArkansasMatters.com.

Custody of homes becoming main debate in divorce cases

Breaking up is hard to do and it can be even harder in a bad economy.

Lawyers say divorce rates are dropping because people simply can't afford to part ways right now.

Contact 13's Tricia Kean explains a new twist in a classic custody battle.

It was love at first sight when Marybeth Perrault found her dream home.

"I thought I would retire here and knew that this was a house that we could raise the family in," said Marybeth.

That was three years ago and now Marybeth and her husband have split and her dream home has become a nightmare.

"Now I can't stand it. The house is heavily mortgaged," said Marybeth.

Spouses used to fight to keep the house, often their biggest asset.

Now, lawyers say it can be the hot potato that nobody wants.

Attorney Gary Nickelson is President of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

He says it's the newest divorce dilemma.

"Everybody wants the asset that's worth something. Nobody wants the asset that's not worth anything or has debt attached to it," said Gary.

Neither Marybeth nor her husband could afford the house on their own, so she's living there.

They put it on the market, but so far there are no takers.

Divorce attorney Vikkie Ziegler says the current climate is forcing many couples to get creative.

"I'll allow one party to remain in the home, not pull the equity out, try to come up with a financial package, and then perhaps when a child turns 18 or graduates high school, they'll sell it because the market perhaps would be better," said Vikkie.

Nickelson says he's even hearing stories of couples staying together after they're divorced.

"'Well, we can't get rid of the house, so I tell you what. We'll just live in the house until times are better. You can take the upstairs and I'll take the downstairs," explained Gary.

Here is the Contact 13 bottom line if you are thinking about a divorce and fear your house will be a big issue, experts say it's more important than ever to plan things out.

Talk to a mortgage broker, a financial advisor and a realtor.

Before selling take into account whether you or your ex can afford the mortgage on your own and find out if you would qualify to refinance and reduce the monthly payments.

From Action News Las Vegas.

Money problems lead to busy week for divorce lawyers

The "double whammy" of Christmas and the credit crunch will make this week one of the busiest ever for divorce lawyers, experts said today.

One in four people say their relationship is under strain because of money problems, according to a new survey.

Ironically, 11% of those polled say they are being forced to stay in a failing relationship because the financial crisis means they cannot afford to leave.

Researchers for online advice centre InsideDivorce.com found almost two million couples in Britain were suffering marital difficulties and 1.3 million people were considering splitting up.

The traditional New Year rush to end marriages after the stress of Christmas means divorce lawyers brand today D-Day, or Divorce Day, kick-starting their busiest week of the year.

And with 17% of divorced men blaming financial problems for the end of their marriage, the credit crunch is putting extra pressure on relationships in trouble.

Leading divorce lawyer James Stewart from Manches LLP said: "A stressful Christmas is already often the final straw for marriages in trouble.

"The double whammy of Christmas and the credit crunch will make the first full week of January one of the busiest ever."

Relate, the UK's largest provider of relationship support, said it had a 59% surge in the number of calls to its centres over the festive period.

TakeLegalAdvice.com, a website which matches consumers with lawyers, also saw enquiries about relationship difficulties soar over Christmas, up a third compared to the same period last year.

"Christmas can be a nightmare for couples who are already experiencing marital problems," said Derek Bedlow, the site's managing editor.

"Many think about divorce but the added pressures brought about by the downturn may be the straw that breaks the camel's back."

Yet divorce creates its own financial problems, with one in three divorcees falling off the property ladder or having to downsize as a result.

Two in five reported increased levels of happiness following their split - though just 29% of men said they were happier, compared with 49% of women.

The survey's revelations about British relationships included the finding that 17% of marriages are entirely sexless - a potential trigger of infidelity, cited by two in five (38%) people as key factor for divorce.

The other common reasons for splits were abuse (34%) and boredom, cited by almost one in three (29%) people.

The survey also revealed that prenuptial agreements are still unusual, used by just 2% of people who were divorced or married.

Nearly a third (28%) of those who had no agreement said in hindsight they regretted the decision not to arrange finances before marriage.

The researchers surveyed 700 married, divorced, separated and cohabiting adults across the UK.

From the Belfast Telegraph.

Breaking Up Is Harder to Do After Housing Fall

When Marci Needle and her husband began to contemplate divorce in June, they thought they had enough money to go their separate ways. They owned a million-dollar home near Atlanta and another in Jacksonville, Fla., as well as investment properties.

Now the market for both houses has crashed, and the couple are left arguing about whether the homes are worth what they owe on them, and whether there are any assets left to divide, Ms. Needle said.

“We’re really trying very hard to be amicable, but it puts a strain on us,” said Ms. Needle, the friction audible in her voice. “I want him to buy me out. It’s in everybody’s interest to settle quickly. That would be my only income. It’s been incredibly stressful.”

Chalk up another victim for the crashing real estate market: the easy divorce.

With nearly one in six homes worth less than the mortgage owed on it, according to Moody’s, divorce lawyers and financial advisers around the country say the logistics of divorce have been turned around. “We used to fight about who gets to keep the house,” said Gary Nickelson, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. “Now we fight about who gets stuck with the dead cow.”

As a result, divorce has become more complicated and often more expensive, with lower prospects for money on the other side. Some divorce lawyers say that business has slowed or that clients are deciding to stay together because there are no assets left to help them start over.

“There’s an old joke,” said Randall M. Kessler, Ms. Needle’s lawyer. “Why is a divorce so expensive? Because it’s worth it. Now it better really be worth it.”

In a normal economy, couples typically build equity in their homes, then divide that equity in a divorce, either after selling the house or with one partner buying out the other’s share. But after the recent boom-and-bust cycle, more couples own houses that neither spouse can afford to maintain, and that they cannot sell for what they owe. For couples already under stress, the family home has become a toxic asset.

“It’s much harder to move on with their lives,” said Alton L. Abramowitz, a partner in the New York firm Mayerson Stutman Abramowitz Royer.

Mr. Abramowitz said he was in the middle of several cases where the value of the real estate could not be determined. “All of a sudden,” he said, “prices are all over the place, people aren’t closing, and it becomes virtually impossible to judge how far the market has fallen, because nothing is selling.”

For John and Laurel Goerke, in Santa Barbara, Calif., the housing market crashed in the middle of what Mr. Goerke said had been an orderly legal proceeding. At the height of the market, Mr. Goerke said, they had their house appraised at $2.3 million, which would have given them about $1 million to divide after paying off the mortgage. But by the time they sold last year, the value had fallen by $600,000, cutting their equity by more than half.

“That changed everything,” said Mr. Goerke, who is now nearly two years into the divorce process, with legal and other fees of several hundred thousand dollars. “The prospect of us both being able to buy modest homes was eliminated. The money’s not there.”

Now, with both spouses living in rental properties, their lawyers still cannot agree on what their remaining assets are worth. Their wealth is ticking away at $350 an hour, times two.

“It’s got to end,” Mr. Goerke said, “because at some point there’s nothing left to argue about.”

For other couples it does not have to end. Lisa Decker, a certified divorce financial analyst in Atlanta, said she was seeing couples who were determined to stay together even after divorce because they could not sell their home, a phenomenon rarely seen before outside Manhattan.

“We’re finding the husband on one floor, the wife on the other,” Ms. Decker said. “Now one is coming home with a new boyfriend or girlfriend, and it’s creating a layer to relationships that we haven’t seen before. Unfortunately, we’re seeing ‘The War of the Roses’ for real, not just in a Hollywood movie.”

Read the entire article at the New York Times.

Love in stormy times

When the economy sours, unhappy couples often stay together out of financial necessity. But the unhappiness festers, leading to infidelity and other beastly behavior

You can argue over it. But you can be soothed by it, too. It often motivates you to be a better spouse. Sometimes all a little marital tension needs is a nice, generous use of it.

No, not sex. Money.

Money can make relationships easier or more difficult, but is it always dependent on how much there is of it to go around? What happens when challenging economic times make money more scarce?

Quite a lot, it would appear.

Some divorce professionals see a reluctance to separate among unhappy couples when the economy sours. Legal fees are prohibitive, as is the cost of running two soon-to-be-separate households. Houses are harder to sell in the current market, which makes the investment return less certain. Inflation is high. Husband and wife hunker down together to fight the wolf at the door, energized by a renewed sense of survival, joint purpose and richer-for-poorer commitment.

Sorry, that last sentence is false.

Silly me, I must have been having a romantic moment to have even considered the idea. I get all goose-bumpy about how hardship can bring people together. If the United States is facing down the worst financial crisis since the Depression, as many economists warn, you'd think that people would break out M.F.K. Fisher's 1942 classic, How to Cook a Wolf, and think up inspiring, plucky ways to raise their spirits and keep their families intact and afloat, a buffer against the world.

But no.

"I haven't found that this kind of [economic] strain is a positive thing. I haven't seen that it's a cause for reconciliation," observes Deborah Mecklinger, a Toronto marriage counsellor and divorce coach. A spouse who wants to separate may be held back by inopportune economic times, but the unhappiness festers and often leads to "covert behaviour," Ms. Mecklinger says. The would-be bolter may decide to have a secret affair to get through the period until divorce is more affordable. Call it the Recession Affair - it pays emotional dividends.

And if thoughts of separation cannot be stuffed under the rug or smothered in the embrace of a temporary lover, spouses react in one of two ways, divorce experts say. They may work more closely together to find a reasonable economic solution. Often, they decide not to liquidate assets until the market has a chance to recover. The sale of the marital home can also be put off. "Lots of people are converting the basement into an apartment or an attic, and they figure that they will live separately but together and won't incur the cost of a separate household," reports Deborah Graham, a collaborative family lawyer in Toronto. "Our advice to people is that it's not a viable long-term solution - two years maximum. And we write in escape clauses in their agreement."

But often, the wolf at the door can bring out the beast in the spouse.

"When things are tight, the pie is smaller. There are fewer resources to spend [on legal bills] but couples end up spending more because they are fighting for the fewer resources to be divided up. It's a Catch-22," one family lawyer observes.

And then there's the all-important valuation date, or V-date, as lawyers commonly refer to it.

"We get calls, and the wife says, 'He wants to come back,' and I say, 'Well, if he genuinely wants to try, have him agree in advance that the valuation date won't change," says Philip Epstein, a leading family lawyer at Epstein Cole in Toronto. "And then we'll see if he is really interested in reconciliation or in just changing the V-date."

One of the most punishing aspects of divorce in turbulent economic times is the valuation date - the point at which a financial snapshot is taken of the marital assets for division. With the stock market on a roller coaster, that can mean the difference between $100,000 in value one month and $50,000 the next. If the V-date shows the value at $100,000 but market conditions at the time of the division of assets drive it down to $50,000, the higher valuation still stands.

In Ontario, the valuation date is fixed to the day of separation. Judges rarely agree to readjust the value of assets on the V-date at the Ontario Court of Appeal, even when there are wild swings in the market. There is little room for judicial discretion. Which means that the V-date can be a victory date for some spouses, if market conditions are in their favour on the day they separate.

But the Ontario statute on the V-date can encourage devious behaviour on the part of warring spouses. One way to change the V-date, before a separation agreement has been reached, is to reconcile or pretend to. When co-habitation resumes for a period of 90 days or more, a new V-date is set.

"There are no depths to which the human mind can't sink," Mr. Epstein acknowledges ruefully.

In other provinces, there is a floating valuation date, which means that parties have flexibility to agree on a date they deem economically fair to both, and if not, they can argue the case in court, where judges have greater discretion to reapportion family assets. Mr. Epstein, who is also editor-in-chief of Reports in Family Law, acknowledges that, "in Ontario, property trials are discouraged because it is a fairly rigid system, but it is a scheme that works tremendous unfairness in difficult economic times."

Even when spouses react compassionately to an economic crisis, such as a job loss, many come to regret their generosity.

"I have seen many cases in which the husband loses a job, and the couple make a decision to postpone divorce in order to avoid the double whammy," Ms. Graham says. Many middle-aged men start up a consulting business from home, as job prospects dwindle for their age bracket. Often those new ventures are not successful. "Years can go by, and at some point, the wife, who has been employed outside the home, says, 'I can't do this any more,' and she leaves, but now she has a big spousal support obligation."

Ah, money and the Me Generation.

For better? For worse? I don't think so. The boomers have lived through a sustained period of economic prosperity, and perhaps as a result have never had the opportunity to experience how hardship can engender a greater sense of commitment to each other.

Mr. Epstein explained it best when he offered his impression of how a souring economy affects some people's decision to divorce: "[They] say, 'I was prepared to put up with you when times were good, but not now. If I am going to suffer, I'd rather suffer without you.' "

From the Globe and Mail.

Seven Myths of Divorce

Myth 1: Most men cheat on their wives.

Actually, the best designed study to date indicates that nearly 80% of men report that they have never cheated on their wives.

Myth 2: Most divorcing women are jilted by their husbands.

Many studies have corroborated that the great majority of divorces (two thirds to three quarters, depending on the study) are initiated by women. This makes sense because numerous studies indicate that men are generally happier being married than are women, they report less marital frustration and dissatisfaction, and are less likely to consider the option of divorce.

Myth 3: Women bitterly regret divorce.

Most divorced women do not regret divorcing. Moreover, divorced women are generally happier than divorced men. And one large study suggests that many middle-aged women become happier after their divorce. These women showed an increase in positive self-image and self-esteem and were inspired by their divorce to gain more control of their lives. Many enjoyed sex more after their divorce.

Myth 4: Women emerge from divorce more emotionally scarred and psychologically damaged than do men.

This is generally not true. Not only are divorced women happier than divorced men, but they are better off emotionally too. In study after study they consistently outscore divorced men on psychological tests to assess emotional health and well-being.

Myth 5: Ex-spouses are highly antagonistic toward one another, even to the point of acting unethically.

Divorced couples, of course, vary widely in the civility of their interactions. But about half of divorced men and women even describe their relationship with their ex-spouse as friendly or cooperative.

Myth 6: Most divorced men can remarry while most divorced women cannot.

It is true that divorced women are less likely than divorced men to want to remarry (after all, they are happier than the men with being divorced). But both groups do remarry at very high rates--and soon. About 80% of divorced men and 75% of divorced women remarry whether or not they have children, and most do so within three years.

Myth 7: The economic consequences of divorce devastate women more than men.

Women are generally worse off financially in the years immediately following a divorce. This has less to do with divorce than with the fact that women generally make less money than men.

From the Independent.

Fed up with gossip, British millionaire posts details of his divorce settlement on the Web

Businessman Gary Dean was sick of the gossip. He found that following a divorce from his wife of almost 20 years, local rumormongers had branded him a cheapskate.

So he took the unusual step of posting details of his divorce settlement on the Internet, allowing neighbors and strangers alike to learn of the luxury cars, expensive jewelry and 3.7 million pounds (US$7.4 million) in cash awarded to his former wife, Helen.

"Over the course of the last year I have been subject to gossip about my divorce, some of it just silly tittle-tattle, and some of it malicious," Dean, 47, wrote on the site,

http://www.deandivorce.com.

Dean said he had been depicted by some as a "greedy, tight, ruthless" man "who abandoned my wife and children."

"It's simply not true at all and I've decided that instead of allowing the rumor mill to continue churning out nonsense, I'd just set out the actual facts to stop it," Dean wrote.

Divorce hearings in Britain are held in private, and the details of settlements rarely become public. When Paul McCartney and Heather Mills divorced earlier this years, the judge took the unusual step of revealing details of the US$50 million settlement to appease intense press and public hunger for information.

Details of the Deans' divorce, settled at a court in Preston, northwest England, in July 2007, show that Gary Dean agreed to pay his wife a lump sum of 3.7 million pounds, plus 15,000 pounds (US$30,000) a year for each of their four children until they are 17.

His wife also got to keep all her jewelry, diamonds and watches, a Mercedes E500, an Audi convertible and the personalized license plates 7HD and 10HD.

The site also provides a description of the couple's comfortable lifestyle, which included "two or three holidays a year on average in high-class hotels."

"I take no joy in setting this all out here," wrote Dean, a publishing and advertising millionaire who lived with his wife and family in the village of St. Michaels, northwest England.

"I'd rather it be unnecessary, but if it stops the gossip, the sneering looks and the seriously defamatory comments being made about me it will have been worth it."

He told Friday's edition of The Times newspaper that being a millionaire in a small community had made him something of a local celebrity.

"If I lived in a city like London, Manchester or Birmingham, where there are a lot of wealthy people, the type of money I have earned would mean nothing," he said. "When you live in a small area it's almost like living in a goldfish bowl."

From the International Herald Tribune.

ABC, NBC Say Economy Is Having Opposite Effects on Divorce Rates

NBC says economy is keeping marriages together; ABC says it's splitting them up

Only on the network news could one culprit – the economy – be blamed for both a rise and a fall in divorce rates. But in one week, NBC and ABC managed to do just that.

NBC “Today” co-host Natalie Morales reported July 11 that divorce rates are down because the “troubled” economy is forcing people to stay together for financial reasons.

Just six days later, “Good Morning America” anchor Chris Cuomo reported that divorce rates are up because the bad economy is tearing couples apart.

“Bad economy, could it be bad news for marriages? Well if you start asking the divorce attorneys, they say yes. In New York, one attorney says 20 percent surge in divorce filings since the news on Wall Street,” Cuomo said on the July 17 show, adding that “money in marriages is always an issue.”

The graphics read “Is rough economy bad for love?” That was following ABC reporter Deborah Roberts’s introduction of the segment where she said “declining stocks could mean soaring divorce rates.”

The ABC cast discussed the causes for the high divorce rates and insinuated that people on Wall Street marry for money. ABC weatherman Sam Champion was put off by his vision of a supposedly calloused Wall Street attitude of, “Well, if we don’t have the money I’m out.”

Roberts added, “But you’re also talking about a certain segment of the population. Wall Street folks, and not to paint them all with a broad brush, but a lot of people who maybe did get into this thing for money.” Cuomo, meanwhile, came up with the simplest explanation for the high divorce rates (according to ABC): “Money corrupts.”

ABC’s report ran in complete contrast to the “Today” report on NBC July 11. “[W]hile the price of divorce normally doesn’t run that high, there is evidence the troubled economy is forcing some troubled couples to stay together, at least for the time being,” Morales said on “Today” July 11.

Farnoosh Torabi, a correspondent for the financial Web site TheStreet.com, explained that, “for example, we’ll take the Miami-Dade County – for example – in south Florida. They had an 18 percent drop-off in divorce filings from January to May of this year, compared to the same period last year…[I]ncidentally, also in that same area, real estate prices have fallen 20 percent.”

From the Business and Media Institute.

Subpoena of Internet Service Provider Records in a Divorce Case:

From London v. Does 1-4, an unpublished Ninth Circuit memorandum from last week:

In 2005, Jennifer London, a United States citizen who was domiciled in St. Martin, began divorce and child custody proceedings against her husband, Richard London, also a United States citizen, in St. Martin, a French territory governed by French law. Jennifer sought a divorce from Richard based on adultery, a ground for a fault-based divorce. To establish the adultery, Jennifer introduced evidence in the divorce proceeding to suggest that Richard had used five pseudonymous Yahoo! email accounts to solicit sex on the Internet. Richard denied that the email accounts belonged to him and claimed that Jennifer had fabricated the evidence.

Thereafter, Jennifer filed an application in district court for an order to conduct discovery on the five Yahoo! email accounts under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for use in her foreign divorce case. The district court granted the application and issued a subpoena to Yahoo! directing it to produce: (1) documents identifying the names, addresses, and telephone numbers provided by the users of the five email accounts; (2) documents describing the dates on which the five email accounts were created; (3) documents describing the Internet protocol address (IP) from which the five email accounts were created; (4) documents identifying Internet groups in which the account users participated; and (5) documents reflecting group board postings made by the account users. Jennifer served Yahoo! with the subpoena, and agreed to waive the right to documents listed in item five. Richard and the four Does moved to quash the subpoena, which the district court denied....

The proof sought, given the nature and character of the foreign case, is critical to establish adultery, secure the divorce, and defend against allegations of fabrication. Such evidence may be the only way to identify the user of the email accounts used to solicit adulterous sex. The request is not an attempt to avoid foreign evidence rules, and is not unduly intrusive or burdensome because it seeks to gather only identifying information for the accounts, such as the names and addresses of the users, and not the content of any communication. Given the need for the evidence, and the minimal invasion required, the [Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices] factors weigh in favor of granting the request.

Appellants’ contention that granting the [discovery] request violates their First Amendment right to anonymous speech is also without merit. Appellants cite no authority for the proposition that the First Amendment bars release of identifying data for email accounts used to solicit sex partners on the Internet. We have held that exposure of some identifying data does not violate the First Amendment. See People of State of Cal. v. F.C.C., 75 F.3d 1350, 1362 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding that order identifying phone numbers through a caller identification service did not violate the First Amendment right to speak anonymously). Thus, because a legal privilege was not implicated, the district court properly denied the motions to quash the subpoena.

From the great Volokh Conspiracy.

Survey: 70 Percent of Americans Find Divorce 'Morally Acceptable'

An alarming 70 percent of Americans now believe that divorce is “morally acceptable,” according to a recent poll by Gallup’s 2008 Values and Beliefs survey.

The new figure – the highest on record – represents an 11 percent increase from just 7 years ago and a 3 percent increase from 2 years ago. Only 22 percent of Americans said they believed divorce was “morally wrong,” according to the results.

The acceptability of divorce among Americans was ranked higher than all of the other 16 ethical issues surveyed – including the death penalty, gambling, pre-marital sex, homosexuality, abortion and medical research on animals. Additionally, divorce has risen faster in moral acceptability among Americans than any of the other ethical issues.

Although the recent results revealed that the acceptability of divorce has risen steadily to the point where it is now “morally acceptable by a majority of nearly every major demographic category of Americans,” respondents who identified themselves as “conservative,” “religious,” or over 65 years in age were more likely to say that divorce was “morally wrong.”

Respondents who identified themselves as “liberals,” “independents,” and “non-religious,” on the other hand, registered the highest number of responses that said divorce was “morally acceptable.” Nearly 91 percent of those who said religion was “not very important” in their lives said divorce was “morally acceptable,” according to the results.

While the recent poll reveals a steady and alarming rise in the acceptability of divorce, more than 70 percent of Americans continued to rate suicide, cloning humans, polygamy, and “married men and women having an affair” as “morally unacceptable.”

The Gallup poll results were based on telephone surveys of over 1,000 adults.

From the Christian Post.