Articles Posted in California

By

A recent ballot initiative in Colorado might just make saying “I do” a little bit more complex by requiring couples engaged to be married to attend a designated number of hours of state-mandated pre-marital education classes before tying the knot. The ballot initiative was proposed by a California organization known as Kids Against Divorce. The organization intends to introduce similar measure across the country in the future. Perhaps California will be next.

According to the Denver Post, the proposed initiative, known as the Colorado Marriage Education Act, would require first time couples to attend 10 hours of marriage education. For those planning to walk down the aisle for the second time, 20 hours of marriage education would be required. And for those walking down the aisle for a third time, 30 hours of marriage education would be mandated before being allowed to get their marriage license. There would of course be an exception for widows, who would be held to the same requirement as those getting married for the first time. After completing the required amount of education, couples would be issued a “Marriage Course Completion Certificate” by the Colorado State Board of Marriage and Family Therapist Examiners.

As with any proposed ballot initiative, requiring couples to attend pre-marital education classes has its pros and cons. Proponents of the ballot initiative argue that it aims to convey the message that a marriage license should be treated like a driver’s license, license to practice law, cosmetology license, or any other license. If these other licenses require a minimum amount of education to prepare a person to drive or practice in their career, why shouldn’t a marriage license require the same to prepare individuals to fulfill their future role as a spouse and potentially as a parent? Proponents further argue that the requirement wouldn’t be overly burdensome and it’s worth it to potentially help couples go into their marriage as a stronger couple unit with more knowledge and better prepared for the commitment they will be making. Furthermore, there is the high potential for a reduction in divorces and in turn a reduction in the significant amount of taxpayer dollars spent each year on courts that handle divorces. On another note, proponents argue that many people would benefit from the tax credit that the ballot initiative offers to married couples who voluntarily choose to complete continuing marital education.

However, as would be expected, there are some Colorado residents who vehemently oppose the proposed measure. These individuals are arguing that it is an overstepping of the government to decide what education people should or should not receive before getting hitched. Others seem to feel that they are ready to get married without the need for education classes or that education classes that they are already taking through their church should be sufficient. Or maybe it’s the cost associated with the education classes (and paid for by the couples) that is the source of outrage for opponents.
Continue reading

By

Jurisdiction is a complicated issue even for experienced attorneys. It is understandable that family law litigants are often unsure regarding where to file their case especially if the parties live in separate states or cities. In addition, jurisdiction may present a problem if one party would like to modify a previous custody and visitation order and neither party lives in the state which originally issued the order. In San Diego, the family court website will direct potential litigants to the particular family courthouse where a case should be filed. San Diego family court jurisdiction is divided by zip code of the filing party. This means that the filing party only needs to enter his or her zip code and the website will direct him or her to the correct courthouse. However, these web tools do not provide guidance for parties with complicated jurisdictional questions.

In general, before a court can exercise jurisdiction over a case (hear the matter) the court must determine it has subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the parties. The subject matter jurisdiction requirement means that the particular court hearing the case must have the legal authority to hear that specific type of case. For example, a bankruptcy court will not entertain a divorce case and a criminal court will not make rulings in a bankruptcy case. In any custody case, family courts will have subject matter jurisdiction over the matter. Therefore, all requests for custody orders or a modification to a current order should be filed with a family court.

If the parents of a child live in separate states, the state where each parent resides will not likely have personal jurisdiction over the other parent. Personal jurisdiction requires one of the following: (1) living in the state with the intent to remain, (2) personal service while physically present in the state, (3) consent, (4) sufficient minimum contacts, (5) or pursuant to a long arm statue. Each of these methods of acquiring personal jurisdiction involves a complicated legal analysis and citation of legal authority not available to most family law litigants. Considering this requirement, it may seem impossible to get custody orders from a state if your co-parent does not live in the same state.

Fortunately, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act (“UCCJEA”) provides clear authority for jurisdiction over custody matters. The UCCJEA states that a child’s “home state” shall have exclusive and continuing jurisdiction for child custody litigation. A child’s “home state” is defined as the state where the child has lived with a parent for at least six consecutive months prior to the commencement of the proceeding. If the child is younger than six months old, the “home state” is the state where the child has lived since birth. Therefore a custody case should be filed in the state where the child resides regardless if one parent lives out of state.
Continue reading

By

Being awarded child support is very important for financial stability of the child support recipient and his/her children. Thus, the possibility of not receiving the child support that is owed can be detrimental. One question often in the minds of child support recipients is whether the payor spouse can avoid paying for child support by filing for bankruptcy.

Luckily, the Bankruptcy Code is designed to attempt to protect the rights of the former spouse to collect child support due to him or her. Congress apparently realized that child support debt is too important and thus should not be able to be discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. Typically when a debtor files for bankruptcy an automatic stay comes into effect which halts creditors from collecting on their debts from the debtor. However, this automatic stay does not apply to enforcement of the collection of child support. The spouse who receives the child support doesn’t even have to file any proof of claim or objection to the bankruptcy court in order to enforce his or her right to receive the child support. Rather, an existing order to pay child support debts remains in effect and will continue to accrue during and even after the bankruptcy case is completed. As a result, a former spouse that files bankruptcy cannot avoid paying child support. However, it is important to note that past due child support that was owed as of the date of filing for bankruptcy might not be paid immediately. The automatic stay will often prevent this issue from being addressed until the automatic stay is lifted, especially if there are many credits in line.

Although child support can be extremely burdensome on the payor, filing for bankruptcy is not an effective means of eliminating the financial obligation. A better forum to reduce child support payments is the family law court, if appropriate factors apply of course. However, filing for bankruptcy might help reduce other unsecure debts such that child support obligations may be easier to afford for the payor spouse.

Another important note is that if you are the recipient of child support and you file for bankruptcy, the child support payments you receive are exempt from bankruptcy proceedings, meaning that those payments cannot be used to pay creditors.
Continue reading

By

Those born and raised in the United States tend to have the understanding that they are free to say anything they wish behind the protections of the First Amendment. However, courts have put a number of restrictions on free speech such as prohibitions against defamation, obscenity, and harassment. In a recent family law case involving basketball star Steve Nash, family courts placed another restriction on the First Amendment. In the Nash case, the Arizona Court of Appeals placed a muzzle on social media communications in family law proceedings.

In nearly every child custody and/or visitation order the judge (or the parties through agreement) will include the following language:

Neither parent shall make negative statements about the other in the presence or hearing of the children or question the children about the other parent. The parents shall communicate directly with each other in matters concerning the children and shall not use the children as a messenger between them. The children shall not be exposed to court papers or disputes between the parents, and each parent shall make every possible effort to ensure that other people comply with this order.

Not surprisingly, this language was included in the Nash joint custody agreement. Following the issuance of this standard admonition, Nash’s ex-wife, Alejandra Amarilla, was alleged to have made disparaging remarks about him through her social media account, Twitter. As a result, Nash petitioned the court to intervene arguing that his former spouse was violating the non-disparaging clause. Amarilla defended her actions citing the First Amendment’s freedom of speech clause in support of her case. The First Amendment has frequently been expanded to include “speech” in the form of electronic communication.

In the Nash case, the court held that Ms. Amarilla’s conduct was not protected by the First Amendment and made an order prohibiting both parties from making disparaging comments about each other on social media sites. The court based its decision on the fact that Steve Nash is a highly public figure and therefore the comments made by his former wife were likely to reach their children. The court also noted that social media comments or postings cannot be adequately controlled or maintained to prevent exposure of improper conduct to the children. Ms. Amarilla appealed the trial court’s ruling and the Arizona Court of Appeals determined that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and upheld the earlier ruling.

Since the Nash case was recently decided, its effect on other family law matters is unknown. However, a good argument exists for the position that the Nash case is inapplicable in ordinary divorce matters because the parties’ social media sites are not as prolific as those of celebrities.
Continue reading

By

Despite their typical tough exterior, recent studies indicate that men actually seem to have a more difficult time coping with divorce than women. Unfortunately, studies also show that divorced men are more likely to have heart disease, strokes, high blood pressure, and commit suicide.

One reason why men may have a more difficult time coping with divorce is because oftentimes men don’t let themselves properly grieve during the divorce process. Unlike most women, men tend to bottle up their feelings and oppose therapy or other means of getting their emotions out. As a result, they are less likely to lean on others for support and to release their built up emotions and stress stemming from the divorce.

Women, on the other hand, are much more apt to seek assistance from friends, family, a therapist or even a support group regarding their emotions. Doing so helps women to be more emotionally prepared to tackle the challenges and stressors that come with a divorce. Without the ability to properly grieve and reach out to others for support, men are more likely to experience feelings of depression. If men want to properly grieve and allow themselves to heal during and after a divorce, it’s necessary to put aside the “Men don’t cry” and “I can do this alone” attitude and instead reach out to those who can help with the grieving process. Addressing emotions early on can help the grieving process later on down the road.

Another reason men may have a harder time coping with divorce is because they tend to lose their sense of identity as a result of the divorce. This is especially true when the man’s role in the marriage is the “breadwinner” and “protector” and then they become disconnected from their children during or after the divorce. Many men have a paternal instinct to be a provider so when the family dynamic changes because of a divorce, men are often times forced to re-identify their role. Those men who remain very connected and involved in their children’s lives, however, tend to have an easier time re-instilling any lost sense of identity and belonging.
Continue reading

By

One of the most common questions asked in an initial divorce consultation is “how much will this divorce cost me?” Many prospective clients are surprised when divorce attorneys answer “I have no idea”. The only concrete information a family law attorney can provide clients regarding the cost of their divorce matter is the filing fees imposed by the courts ($435 in 2013). Other than basic hard costs and billing methods, divorce attorneys can provide clients with little information regarding the cost of their divorce at the initial consultation because the overall cost is based on a combination of the following factors.The Client: A family law client has the ability to greatly influence the cost of his or her divorce. If the client needs a lot of counseling or “hand holding” his or her bills will generally be much higher because the clients repeated phone calls and e-mails substantially increase the time an attorney devotes to the case. Considering the fact that a vast majority of family law attorneys charge an hourly billing rate, daily e-mails and phone calls could potentially add up to thousands of dollars per month.

The Opposing Party: Generally the attitude of the opposing party falls into one of a few categories: (1) emotionally stable and ready to move on with his or her life, (2) angry, vindictive, and willing to do anything to “get back at” his or her spouse, (3) hopeful that the parties can reconcile and therefore doing everything possible to delay the divorce process or (4) self-proclaimed victim who is busy feeling sorry for him/herself. If the opposing party wishes to drag out the divorce process, for whatever reason, there are endless methods of doing this. Delay is particularly easy for a non-represented party who does not incur attorney fees by filing countless motions, propounding burdensome discovery, or litigating every small issue.

The Opposing Counsel: Just like repeated communication with the client can increase attorney fees, onerous correspondence from the opposing attorney can greatly increase the cost of a divorce. This is because attorneys generally have a duty to read and respond to all pleadings and correspondence from the other side. Further, family law attorneys generally have a reputation for either working amicably with the other side to reach a mutually beneficial agreement whenever possible or for using their client’s vulnerable state to fuel litigation for their own financial gain. Therefore, the general practice of the opposing attorney will likely minimize or increase the overall cost of divorce.The Judge/Court: Every family law judge in San Diego is different. As such, every judge has a different calendar, schedule, and view of each case. Many of the court calendars are impacted and family law motions go months before being heard.

Number/Complexity of Contested Issues: The number and complexity of the contested issues in a divorce case is a major factor in the overall cost. For example, if the parties were married for 15 years but have no children, no real property, no retirement accounts/savings, and both earn similar incomes there will be few issues to litigate. However, if the parties were married for three years but have two minor children, retirement accounts, own a home and only one spouse works, the parties will have to address property division, custody and visitation, and support issues. The more contested issues that exist, the longer and more expensive the divorce will be. However, if the contested issues are not complex, a simple hearing will generally resolve the disputes and keep costs low.
Continue reading

By

Many women choose to take their husband’s last name when they get married. Jennifer Lopez, known by many as “JLo”, did just that when she married Marc Anthony in 2004. According to her legal documents, JLo’s legal name is Jennifer Muniz, which is her husband’s legal last name. But, according to TMZ, now that the couple is on the road to divorce “JLo” is adamant about getting her maiden name back!

Just like you made the choice to take your soon to be ex-husband’s last name when you got married, you can chose to restore your maiden name post-divorce or just keep your married last name, despite the divorce. Some considerations to think about when deciding whether or not to change your name are the impact a name change has with regards to your children, your profession and your well-being. Some women prefer not to have a different last name as their children and therefore keep their married name. To others, this isn’t that big of a deal. If you made a name for yourself at work before marriage and then put work on hold during your marriage, perhaps you will want your maiden name back so you can return to the same industry post-divorce and be recognized a bit easier. When deciding whether or not to change your name back it’s also important to think about whether it’s worth the extra time and hassle to change your name on your driver’s license, passport, financial accounts, etc. Perhaps you are more comfortable with your married name because that’s how the people in your community know you, or maybe you want nothing to do with your soon to be ex-husband and want a fresh start. Either way, divorce attorneys will advise their clients that changing your last name back after a divorce is a personal decision and you are entitled to do as you wish. Your soon to be ex-husband cannot force you to change your last name back or to keep your married name.

Changing your name back to your maiden name can be done either at the time of the divorce or at a later date after your divorce is final. However, if you already know that you want your maiden name back, it’s a good idea to go ahead and take care of it during the divorce process. A specific provision can be included in your marital settlement agreement such as the following: “This Judgment incorporating the terms of this Agreement shall restore to Wife her former name of ____.” Doing so will allow you to avoid any stress or time related to going through the process to change your name after the divorce has already been finalized.
Continue reading

By

As we have previously blogged, states along the East Coast have begun a movement to reform spousal support (what their laws refer to as “alimony”). The reformers argue that in many cases spousal support awards persist too long or at too high of a level after divorce. In order to reduce this problem, the reformers propose laws which focus on rebuilding the parties’ lives after divorce and encourage supported spouses to learn to take care of themselves. We discussed the potential impact of these new laws and what effect they might have on California legislation. In particular, Massachusetts enacted a new spousal support law last year that was praised as a model for future reform. Although the new law has been in place for a reasonable period of time, reformers are not very satisfied with the results.

In order to accomplish the goal of encouraging spouses to become self-supporting post-divorce, the new “alimony laws” set time limits on spousal support for marriages of 20 years or less and generally stop spousal support payments when the supporting spouse reaches retirement age. By contrast, in California, there is generally no time limit placed on spousal support awards made pursuant to a long term marriage (defined as any marriage lasting approximately 10 years or more).

In addition, the new laws place strict restrictions on cohabitation. Under the reformed laws, spousal support will end if the supported spouse cohabitates with a new partner for at least three months. One of the issues which has arisen regarding the cohabitation clause is whether it applies to supported spouses who moved in with a new partner before the new law took effect. Currently in California, cohabitation is a factor that might be considered a “material change of circumstances” in a post-judgment support modification motion; but it is not grounds for automatic termination of support. California and Massachusetts do seem to share the general public policy disfavoring continued spousal support when the supported spouse moves in with his or her new partner.

Change can be difficult to effectuate in any area of law where the decision makers are comfortable in their “old ways”. Some complain that Massachusetts judges are to blame for stifling the progress of new legislation. These judges are accused of misinterpreting or even ignoring the law which encourages spouses to become self-supporting after divorce. Family law is notorious for giving judicial officers wide discretion. Appeals are not generally successful unless the appellate can prove abuse of discretion.
Continue reading

By

In October of 2013, Orlando Bloom and Miranda Kerr announced that they will be ending their marriage. However, TMZ reports that despite their impending divorce, they still intend to remain a family and hold no hard feelings against one another. Although this attitude could change as the divorce progresses, perhaps Bloom and Kerr will instead be an example of how divorce doesn’t always have to be a nuclear experience. However, this will likely only be achieved if they avoid some of the common mistakes described below.

1. Avoid Responding to the Divorce with Anger
The divorce process can be an extremely emotional time and it’s very typical for people to say things they do not mean or to act in uncharacteristic manners. Responding to the divorce with anger will simply create an escalating war between you and your spouse and will lead you nowhere but backwards. Instead, let a little time pass and try to blow off some steam before reacting so that you can move the divorce forward in a reasonable manner.

2. Avoid Bringing a Significant Other Into the Mix
While you might have the urge to announce your new lover as a form of revenge to prove to your spouse that someone else finds you attractive and that you can be happy without your spouse, the divorce process is already potentially volatile so just mentioning that you have a new lover has the potential to absolutely infuriate your spouse. The more infuriated your spouse is with you, the less chance you have of a quick and painless divorce. Thus, it might just be best to wait until the divorce is over before you think about engaging in a new relationship.

3. Avoid Concealing Information
Many people going through a divorce find it quite tempting to omit or conceal pertinent information in their divorce case, typically surrounding finances. If you think that nobody will ever find out, think again. The majority of times someone like a forensic accountant or a private investigator for instance, does find out. And when this happens, you immediately lose credibility and cause increased litigation costs. All in all, hiding information is just not worth it.

4. Avoid Reducing the Time Spent With Your KidsDuring the divorce one spouse typically moves out of the family home at some point. When this happens, that spouse tends to get preoccupied with the divorce process, or gets busy with work trying to make more money to be able to afford living away from the family home. As a result, time spent with the kids is often much less than what it used to be. This is one mistake to surely avoid. During your divorce, spending time with your children should be one of your top priorities. It might also be a good idea to keep a journal logging hours spent with your kids and what you did during those times. When it comes to child custody determination this might be helpful. More importantly, spending time with your children will probably help make you feel whole, despite the destruction that divorce is causing.
Continue reading

By

In our modern world, it is no longer uncommon for the wife to be the breadwinner of the family. Research has actually shown that in more than 40% of households the wife is the main breadwinner. More and more husbands, on the other hand, are becoming stay at home fathers, taking over traditional female roles and running the home front while the wives are out in the working world and taking responsibility for “bringing home the bacon.” Divorce attorneys are encountering this type of family dynamic more and more in dissolution cases. This increase in female breadwinners challenges the societal norms and traditional gender-based expectations of men being the financial contributor and women taking care of the house and family.

Along with this new and rising family dynamic also comes a rise in new relationship challenges. In fact, research findings report that both husbands and wives tend to be less happy when the female is the breadwinner. Given these findings it isn’t too shocking that the risk of divorce rises when the wife is the breadwinner. Recent studies even report that the divorce rate is 50% higher when the wife earns more than her husband.

So why is it that women who earn more than their husbands have a much less chance of a successful marriage? Perhaps it’s because couples don’t discuss and define their financial and support roles and come to some kind of agreement – something that could be addressed in a premarital agreement. It might be that expectations become muddled and lead to an increase in relationship conflicts. Or perhaps it’s because the women are shouldering all of the financial burdens by working long, tiring hours and yet the men are perceived to be failing to take on a comparable amount of responsibilities on the domestic front. Research also suggests that the social stigma attached to a female breadwinner is also the culprit of subconscious anger and jealousy in marital relationships because the women are more likely to feel that their husbands are not pulling enough weight in the marriage.
Continue reading

Contact Information
Del Mar Technology Center
12348 High Bluff Dr, #220
San Diego, CA 92130
Phone: 858-793-8884
Fax: 858-793-8874

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Bickford Blado & Botros
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design