divorce

Property division can be more complicated the second time around

When a Massachusetts couple is engaged, the last thing on their minds is how their property would be divided in the event of a divorce. No one want to start a marriage by planning for the details of property division in the event that the union does not last. However, statistics show that one out of every two first marriages will not last. For couples walking down the aisle a second or third time, that number swells to 67 percent. Making matters worse, spouses who face a second divorce are more likely to take a greater financial hit the second time around. One reason that a second or later divorce is potentially more financially damaging is simple: there is often less to be divided. One or both spouses may still be paying alimony or child support from a previous marriage. In addition, many people see a decline in their financial stability when a prior divorce forces the sale of assets such as a home or investments. There could also be tax implications as a result of selling off assets to settle a divorce. Factor in a lethargic economy, a slow job market and a persistent decline in home values, and it becomes easy to see how a second divorce can cause more financial damage than the first. The end of a second or third marriage may also come at a stage in life where retirement is on the horizon. Other spouses may be beginning to experience increased costs associated with

Read More »

A greater number of women are paying alimony to their husbands

Alimony and child support in the past has been traditionally seen as something that men pay to their ex-wives. In this traditional role, women were expected to stay at home and take care of the children, and thus needed to be financially supported after a divorce. However, with gender equality becoming more widespread in Massachusetts and elsewhere, alimony and child support are now awarded to the husband in many cases. A nationwide study shows that divorce lawyers across the United States, including in Massachusetts, have seen an increase of women who pay alimony or child support to their former husbands. Around 56 percent of divorce lawyers report that they’ve seen more women paying child support and 47 percent report a higher rate of women who pay alimony to their former husbands. The reason behind this shift is simple: as women take over the financial responsibilities that were once the sole responsibility of men, courts are holding them to the same responsibilities that husbands alone used to face. This is especially true as many women are able to find higher paying jobs than their husbands in this bad economy. As can be imagined, not all women are happy about having to pay either alimony or child support. In several high-profile cases, several women had bitter disputes in divorce courts over this matter. However, even though many women can feel unfairly treated as they are ordered to pay alimony and child support, this shows a huge step for gender equality has happened.

Read More »

Same-sex couples rights affirmed when lesbian mom files paternity

Unfortunately, same-sex couples’ rights are sadly lacking in many parts of the country. While in Massachusetts, same-sex marriage is allowed and seen positively, in other places many of the same-sex couples’ rights are denied. Fortunately, in one state, clear progress can be seen when a lesbian mother has been allowed to file a paternity suit for her child in a groundbreaking case. Two lesbians had decided to make a family in 2006 in which they would adopt two biological daughters. Because at that time their state didn’t allow them to adopt the children as a lesbian couple, they each legally adopted a girl and raised the two together. However, in 2009, all of this changed. After the women decided to separate, one of the women moved to Norway, taking her legal daughter and leaving behind the girl’s sister and her shocked ex, who had not expected this drastic move. The two sisters didn’t even have the chance to say goodbye to one another. After investigating the various legal options available to her, the woman in the United States, fought for child custody by filing a paternity suit. While paternity suits are typically filed by fathers seeking to spend time with their children, a state law had passed which allowed for non-biological fathers to seek custody. After discussing the case, a judge ruled that the paternity suit was valid since it would be discriminatory to allow non-biological fathers to sue but not non-biological mothers. Massachusetts has traditionally been ahead of the

Read More »

Residency requirements open doors for same-sex divorces

A complex legal issue that is popping up in different states and continues to be addressed in the courts was discussed here previously on the blog. We have news about another new important case involving same-sex marriage and divorce laws. A Rhode Island man is in the midst of trying to divorce his husband after getting married in Massachusetts. Because of Rhode Island’s current laws pertaining to same-sex marriage and divorce, he was forced to move to another state to pursue a divorce. The man decided to move across the state line to Massachusetts and live there for a year before he would be able to file for divorce. However, there is new legislation pending in Rhode Island, according to a local media report that would simplify this matter for people with the same situation. If the new Rhode Island bill passes, any couple could file for a divorce in Rhode Island even if their marriage is not recognized as legal in the state. This would solve the problem faced by same-sex couples who jump state lines in order to establish residency so they can pursue a divorce and not be trapped in marital limbo. Although Rhode Island is not a gay marriage state, it did pass a civil union law in 2011. That piece of legislation provided a legal means for dissolution of a civil union. Whether a person is dissolving a civil union or seeking a divorce from a spouse, he or she will need to ensure that,

Read More »

Divorced man stuck with Madoff-scheme losses

Divorced couples in Massachusetts may believe their final court order settles everything. At the end of the dissolution process the court attempts to ensure that there has been an equitable distribution of assets. However, the court order is not always the end of the line for divorced spouses. A divorced spouse may hire an attorney and bring a matter before an appeals court when something changes in the case. An ex-spouse might believe there is a substantial change in information about assets that were divided and hire a lawyer to take a new action, such as seeking relief from an appeals court. Such was the case in a New York appeals court. A recent media report summarized how a panel of six judges for the New York Court of Appeals ruled in a divorced man’s high asset divorce case. He argued that he and his wife both made a mistake in believing their $5.4 million investment in a Bernard Madoff fund was valid. A panel of six judges discarded the man’s claim that his ex-wife should return $2.7 million she had gotten in “an equitable distribution of property” in their divorce. The man, an attorney, must now live with the financial losses that his Madoff investment incurred. The fund went bankrupt only two years after the couple’s divorce was finalized. The judges decided that the divorced man could have made the decision to cash in his investment in the Ponzi scheme before the financial troubles in 2008. Also, his ex-wife

Read More »

Judge allows same-sex couple to divorce

While more states have legalized same-sex marriages, gay couples whose marriages have fallen on hard times continue to find it difficult to legally divorce their spouse. The problem is that some states feel by permitting a same-sex divorce, they are by default acknowledging same-sex marriage. For example, two women who were married in Massachusetts later moved to Texas, a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage. When the women began divorce proceedings in February 2011, Texas’ general attorney, attempted to stop the judge from allowing their dissolution. His motion stated that because Texas has a constitutional ban on gay marriage, the judge did not have the authority to grant a divorce. The motion was later thrown out by the judge because it was not filed in a timely manner. In a more recent case, two men who were married in New York on September 2011, filed for divorce in Ohio. Ohio, like Texas, does not recognize same-sex marriages and civil unions per a 2004 constitutional amendment. A Columbus judge signed off on the couple’s divorce. Again, the judge hearing the men’s case was met with an onslaught of criticism — called “rogue” by one man in an email to the Columbus Dispatch, a local newspaper. The attorney for one of the men in the case defended the judge’s decision to hear and approve the divorce; stating that Ohio’s constitutional amendment applies only to same-sex marriage and says nothing about same-sex divorce. Ultimately, the real hurdle lies in the fact that

Read More »

Boston father’s obligation to pay upheld by courts

If a woman gives birth to child after she and her husband separate, the husband can still be held financially responsible for the baby. This was the case of a Massachusetts man whose estranged wife gave birth to twins after an in-vitro fertilization involving donor eggs and donor sperm. According to court reports, in 2001, the wife threatened to “withdraw her support for his citizenship application” unless he consented to the procedure. The husband agreed to the IVF procedure provided that she signed an agreement that he would not be have to pay child support for any children she gave birth to. The couple separated shortly thereafter. The court ruled that the father was still financially responsible for the children, twin girls born in 2003. While the in-vitro procedure took place the couple after was separated, the decision to have the children occurred while they were still together. The Massachusetts Appeals Court said, “Simple consent to the procedure is enough to confer parental status.” It is wise for fathers to understand their rights when it comes to having children. This includes whether they will be required by law to provide financial support them even when they are no longer in a relationship with the children’s mother. Some divorce attorneys specialize in different types of family law, including paternity and child support. In this case, the man would have benefited from legal advice before continuing to give his consent to his wife’s in-vitro fertilization treatment. This case began in 2006 when

Read More »

Boston residents watch other states’ same-sex marriage trends

A news story on the minds of Boston residents this week is the newest win for gay rights activists in the neighboring state of New Jersey. In fact, the upcoming decisions made in these other states matters when gay couples move from one state to another in the U.S. This is particularly important as more states recognize same-sex divorce along with marriage rights. Right now, six states, including Massachusetts, recognize same-sex marriages. This New Jersey development comes as more states grapple with what legal rights to award non-traditional couples. According to a Reuters’ report, the legislature in New Jersey legalized same-sex marriage earlier this week. Next, the New Jersey gay marriage bill goes to the governor, a person who could be considered for a vice-presidential bid later this year. Governor Chris Christie, a Republican, has promised to use his governor’s veto on this bill. This may be a setback for gay rights in New Jersey. The vote was passed in a majority of 42 to 33. However, Boston readers should note that the two chambers of the state assembly do not have the two-thirds majority of votes that would be required to override a gubernatorial veto. In related news, Maryland’s House of Delegates postponed until late Feb. 16 a debate on the “Civil Marriage Protection Act,” which has the sponsorship of the liberal governor, Democrat Martin O’Malley. This bill already passed with enough votes in two committees, but not the entire House. Gay rights activists are also watching the progress

Read More »