Nancy J. Bickford

By

Until just recently, there were not any California cases on point regarding whether a licensed professional’s book of business (i.e. list of clients) is something of value that should be considered an asset subject to property division during a divorce proceeding. However, the Fourth Appellate District’s recent decision in In re the Marriage of Mark and Rhonda Finby finally shed light on this issue.

In other jurisdictions, courts have held that licensed professionals’ customer lists generally constitute divisible property during a divorce. In the New York case Moll v. Moll, for example, the Court held that clients serviced by a stockbroker constitute a marital asset because the thing of value is the stockbroker’s personal/professional goodwill. Also in the Florida case Reiss v. Reiss, the Court held that clients that were brought to a new securities firm by a stockbroker constitute a marital asset subject to division.

Similar to the holdings in other jurisdictions described above, in the recently published case In re Marriage of Finby the Fourth District California Appellate Court reversed the trial Court’s decision and found that a book of business that a financial advisor developed during the marriage constitutes an asset that has value and is thus subject to division during a divorce proceeding.As background, in In re Marriage of Finby, the Wife worked as a financial advisor and developed a list of clients (who owned over $192 million in investments) during marriage that she referred to as her “book of business”. Wife left her previous employer and went to work for Wells Fargo, who paid her over $2.8 million as a transitional bonus. Although Wife argued that her book of business did not have value because she could not sell it, the Appellate Court found that it was a valuable asset, reasoning that her book of business was essentially consideration for Wife’s transitional bonus. In other words, Wife was granted the option to earn a significant amount of money based on her work during the marriage of acquiring a book of business. The Court further reasoned that Wife’s ability to transfer her book of business by bringing her clients to Wells Fargo is similar to goodwill, like that which is found in the business of other professions (e.g. lawyers and doctors). As a result, the Court found that the community had an interest in a portion of the transitional bonus and remanded it back to the trial court to determine exactly how much of an interest should be apportioned to Husband.
Continue reading

By

Kansas is considering a bill which would arguably eliminate “no-fault” divorce throughout the state. Currently in Kansas, “incompatibility” is a ground for divorce similar to California’s “irreconcilable differences”. “Incompatibility” and “irreconcilable differences” are both general catch-all no-fault grounds for divorce. The new Kansas bill would replace “incompatibility” with eight reasons the couple is seeking a divorce.

Keith Esau, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, introduced the new “fault divorce” bill. He supports the intent behind the bill (which was authored by an anonymous legislator) because he says “No-fault divorce gives people an easy out instead of working at it.” Other members of the Judiciary have spoken out about the bill noting that the government may be overreaching by limiting a couple’s decision to end their relationship. In response, the bill’s supporters argue that married couples receive significant benefits from the state and therefore the state should be able to limit people from entering into marriages temporarily, reaping the benefits from the state, and then getting out.

Kansas divorce attorneys argue that the new bill will only complicate and prolong the divorce process. Such an adversarial requirement – choosing from a list of fault-based grounds as a reason for the divorce – can make a family matter extremely contentious. Divorce attorneys in Kansas question whether the new bill would deter many couples from petitioning for divorce. Whether the divorce process is “easy” or “difficult” for the parties will likely not be the deciding factor when determining whether to file for divorce. Further, many couples are unfamiliar with divorce laws and the process and therefore do not take them into consideration before filing for divorce.

At Bickford Blado & Botros, we strive to make the divorce process as smooth as possible for all of our clients. This includes a strong effort to resolve all issues without court intervention. If California were to consider a bill eliminating “no-fault” divorce, our firm would be concerned about the effect such a law would have on children caught up in the divorce process. Our attorneys encourage clients to resolve all custody and visitation disputes amicably outside of court. By eliminating “no-fault” divorce thereby increasing the tension and conflict in divorce cases, litigants may be less likely to resolve custody disputes quickly and cooperatively. Court intervention and contentious custody battles are rarely in the best interest of the children and will likely make the divorce transition more difficult for them.
Continue reading

By

Actress Jane Lynch recently settled her divorce proceedings and is actually on good terms with her ex, according to TMZ. Perhaps the reason for their civilized relationship post-divorce is because they resolved their issues through collaborative divorce thus avoiding the emotionally draining process of litigating divorce proceedings in court.

Many people are familiar with litigation and mediation, but not all are familiar with the process of collaborative divorce. That’s because collaborative divorce is a relatively new form of alternative dispute resolution which was developed in the early 1990s. However, collaborative divorce has grown rapidly since then because of its success in leading to healthier and more positive results throughout the divorce process.Unlike litigation, where the Judge makes the decisions regarding the parties’ divorce based on formulas created by the state, collaborative divorce gives the parties the authority and control to decide for themselves and focus on joint and creative problem solving, similar to mediation. The focus of collaborative divorce is to provide a healthy forum with a team of professions to help the couple reach a settlement that is in the best interest of the child and both parties, all while avoiding the uncertainty, expense and added stress that comes with litigating in court. Collaborative divorce also focuses on the future by teaching the parties to interact with each other in a respectful manner which will carry through their post-divorce relationship and co-parenting.

The expanded team of independent professionals who work as a team to be involved in collaborative divorce typically includes attorneys (each spouse has a trained collaborative attorney), child custody specialists, financial specialists, and licensed mental health professionals. Having so many professionals at your fingertips allows for more guidance and access to information which helps to lead to a more mutually beneficial outcome for everyone involved.

Typically, both spouses and their respective collaborative divorce attorneys sign a “Participation Agreement” which outlines their commitment to settle their divorce in a non-adversarial manner, work on their communication and interaction with one another, act in their children’s best interest to minimize emotional damage, retain neutral experts if necessary, and maintain status quo regarding children and assets throughout the collaborative process. The collaborative process requires both parties to dedicate themselves to working through their divorce with an honest and open mindset in which the welfare of their family is the top priority.

Although divorce is the end of a marriage, collaborative divorce can provide the parties involved with the opportunity for a healthy new start in which they are able to move forward with their lives and avoid the bitterness, anger and resentment that is often associated with a divorce.
Continue reading

By

In general, family courts disfavor “bad actors” or spouses who take deliberate steps to disadvantage the other party in anticipation of or during a divorce proceeding. Spouses owe each other the highest duties of good faith and fair dealing – even throughout the divorce process. Specific family law codes were enacted to require spouses to be completely transparent with each other regarding their income, expenses, assets, and debts. This same spirit applies to cases involving disputes over the date of business valuation.

It is not uncommon for the divorce process to drag out for months or even years. The length of the process is dependent on many factors including the complexity of the parties’ estate. When one or both parties own a business that business will likely need to be valued prior to the conclusion of the case. As a default rule, assets (including businesses) are valued as close as possible to the time of trial. In a particularly long divorce case, the business may have a substantially different value at the parties’ date of separation as opposed to the date of trial. One way for a spouse to overcome the general presumption that a business should be valued close to the date of trial is a showing of “bad behavior” by the other spouse.

Failure to Cooperate in Discovery: In divorce cases, family court encourage open discovery of information and documents regarding all assets, including businesses. If the spouse managing the business fails to cooperate in producing pertinent business records the court may decide to value the business at the time proposed by the other spouse. Spouses are not permitted to benefit from confusion intentionally caused regarding the facts of the case.

Commingling Business Operations and Poor Record Keeping: California family courts have also selected an alternative date of valuation in cases where the spouse managing a business so intertwined pre and post-separation operations in poor record keeping that it was impossible to determine the date of separation value even though the court otherwise would have done so.

Breach of Fiduciary Duty: As stated above, spouses owe each other the highest duty of good faith and fair dealing. A violation of that duty can result in a date of valuation aimed to punish the offending spouse. For instance, if a spouse mismanages a business he or she may have to brunt the consequences of the mismanagement entirely as a result of the date of business valuation chosen by the court. California courts have also held that neglecting fiduciary duties could be grounds for an alternative date of valuation.
Continue reading

By

Word is out that actress Hilary Duff and ex-hockey player Mike Comrie have separated and are on the road to a divorce. The couple married in August 2010 and Duff gave birth to their son, Luca, in March 2012. According to TMZ, the couple has mutually agreed upon having an amicable separation and they intend to share joint custody of their son. They even plan on remaining best friends after the divorce.

So often we hear of couples who have just decided to separate or divorce and they are full of feeling of anger, resentment, and shock. But cases like Duff and Comrie who actually seem to be quite pleasant as they separate make you wonder if they did something different from the start. Perhaps the way they informed each other of their desire for a separation/divorce was done in a manner to minimize those heightened emotions that we so often hear about.

The way you break the news to your spouse about your impending separation or divorce can really play a part in laying the foundation for how your divorce will play out. Most people remember the precise details about how his or her spouse broke the news that he or she wanted a divorce. Those parting words will inevitably be extremely difficult but there are certain approaches that may lead to a better parting for both parties.Choose the Right Words: Choosing your words carefully will help to increase the amount of conversation that you provoke from your spouse and decrease the amount of shock that he or she will inevitably experience. Perhaps you are just pondering the thought of divorce, or you are interested in a trial separation. Or maybe you have made up your mind that you want a divorce. Whichever path you have chosen to take, it is important to be clear with your spouse by clearly specifying the degree of finality that you want. For instance, if you are not completely set of the idea of divorce and still just pondering the possibility, you probably don’t want to come out and say to your spouse, “I want a divorce!” Rather, you could approach your spouse by explaining that your relationship doesn’t seem to be improving and inquire what he/she thinks about a separation. This will allow your spouse the opportunity to engage in a conversation with you rather than feeling completely and utterly shocked and merely focused on the word “divorce.”

On the other hand, if you are certain that a divorce is what you want or need, you might want to approach the conversation in a more gentle manner and in the right time and place as to avoid or at least reduce a sudden fury. Your spouse will probably already be devastated at hearing the words “I want a divorce,” so deliberately hurting your spouse’s feelings on top of that and already showing greed about what you want in the divorce will only serve to heighten his/her anger, resentment and urge to be litigious.

Your actions and words will have corresponding reactions. So although a few
words so early on might not seem like a big deal, the choices you make when breaking the news to your spouse that you want a divorce may very well affect your entire divorce process and your life in the future.
Continue reading

By

Often times attorneys consult with prospective clients who have very limited funds to expend on their divorce case, who are only interested in receiving minimal assistance with their divorce case or perhaps just need help getting started. An Attorney-Assisted Divorce provides the option for clients to receive top-notch legal consultation, advice and document preparation while saving the most amount of money possible. Bickford Blado & Botros now offer an Attorney-Assisted Divorce option.

Attorney-Assisted Divorce differs from traditional attorney representation in two main ways: 1) the amount/type of services provided and 2) the cost. Attorney-Assisted Divorce is a unique form of “consulting” based legal services in which the attorney merely advises the client, helps correct legal paperwork and oversees the divorce process. The attorney will not appear on behalf of the client in court proceedings nor be available on a constant basis for phone calls and emails from the client. Since Attorney-Assisted Divorce does not involve formal representation, there is no retainer or hourly rates. Rather, the client is charged a flat fee for particular services.

For instance, if you are at the beginning stages of your divorce, an Attorney-Assisted Divorce package may consist of the following:

1. The client will first have a free 30 minute confidential consultation with a highly experienced and knowledgeable divorce attorney to determine eligibility for the attorney-assisted divorce option and the scope of the case;

2. The paralegal will prepare your Petition/Response, preliminary disclosure documents, and, if there are minor children, a UCCJEA form. All of these documents will then be reviewed by one of the attorneys;

3. The paralegal will file your Petition or Response in court;

4. The paralegal or attorney will inform you on how to serve your spouse or offer for you to use our process server; and
5. If the client and his/her spouse agree on all of their issues, a Marital Settlement Agreement can be prepared for an additional fee.

Going through a divorce can be a complicated yet expensive process. Thus, many individuals appreciate the option to get advice and oversight from an attorney and also get the necessary paperwork and documentation completed all for a flat fee. In addition, many clients appreciate not having to endure the long lines, congestion and potential rejection notices that often come with simply going through the Family Law Facilitator’s Office. However, the client must understand and be comfortable with representing himself/herself. The client’s name will still appear on all of the paperwork as a self-represented litigant to indicate that he/she is not being represented by an attorney, despite the fact that the attorney may be assisting with preparation of documents and filing within the appropriate court.
Continue reading

By

Divorce lawyers are notoriously busy bouncing from hearing to hearing while juggling constant client phone calls and e-mails. Family law is one of the most “client intensive” areas of law, meaning the client plays a much larger role in a divorce action than he or she would in other civil matters. Effective and prompt communication is the top factor for clients in determining their satisfaction with their divorce attorneys. Urgent issues can arise on a daily basis in divorces cases if the parties have a dispute over finances, child custody/visitation, or property. Unfortunately, clients generally do not know how responsive their attorneys will be to these issues until an emergency arises.

Family law firms also tend to be much smaller in size in comparison to other civil litigation practices. If a family law firm only has a couple of employees including the lawyer, it may be difficult for the client to get in contact with his or her attorney. With divorce lawyers out of the office frequently for hearings, meetings, depositions, and settlement conferences, office staff is generally left to handle paperwork, client calls, and a multitude of e-mails. Although it is not impossible for small law firms to efficiently communicate with all of their clients in a reasonable manner, many clients are not satisfied with the attention their case receives.

Once a breakdown in communication has occurred between lawyer and client, both parties tend to be angry and frustrated with the situation. Further, switching attorneys or remedying any consequences of inadequate attention to a case could cost the client additional attorney fees and further delay his or her divorce. Considering it is not uncommon for the divorce process to last one to two years, unnecessary delays can be particularly frustrating for clients.

At Bickford Blado & Botros we work as a team to ensure that each client gets the prompt and careful attention he or she deserves. When a client retains our firm to represent him or her in a divorce matter, a lead attorney, supporting attorney and paralegal are all assigned to the case. This means that if the client needs any information at least one team member will likely be available to assist them. Further, if both attorneys assigned to the case happen to be out of the office when an urgent matter arises, any other attorney currently in the office will be available to handle emergencies. The variety of staff assigned to a case also allows the lead attorney to delegate work to attorneys or paralegals with a much lower billing rate thereby reducing the overall cost for the client.
Continue reading

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

After ten years of marriage, actress Gwyneth Paltrow announced her separation from Coldplay star Chris Martin. According to Paltrow’s website, the couple was working hard (separately and together) on their marriage for the past year without any success. Although neither party has officially filed divorce paperwork, the media speculates that a divorce is well underway. Some celebrities such as Kim Kardashian have litigated their personal family law matters in the public eye. However, more private celebrities tend to keep their personal issues out of the public court system.

Private mediation is a great option for celebrities who want to keep the details of their divorce confidential. Although private mediators are available for any family law litigants, not just celebrities, they tend to be too expensive for most cases. Private mediators in San Diego often charge between $400 and $750 per hour for their services. In addition, when you factor into the cost of private mediation the hourly rate for two attorneys (at least one for each party), the cost of private mediation can cost each party thousands of dollars per day. Some cases inevitably drag on for months or even years because the parties have reached an impasse on one or more issues. In those instances, the parties might agree that private mediation is worth the cost.

The media is buzzing with speculation regarding the Paltrow-Martin split. A lot of the dialogue surrounding this divorce is focused on how simple the dissolution process can be when the parties agree to avoid litigation. Media outlets claim Paltrow and Martin will simply put a rubber stamp on their premarital agreement and end their case. However, the divorce process is not that easy – even for celebrities. In California, family law litigants are required to exchange disclosure documents (consisting of an Income and Expense Declaration and Schedule of Assets and Debts) at the outset of the case. In cases where the parties’ income and/or assets are complex, the exchange of disclosure documents can be a lengthy and expensive process. Inevitably, celebrities will spend a significant amount of money up front on attorney fees incurred for the preparation of their disclosure documents.

In addition to spending large sums of money and a lot of time in order to adequately complete their disclosure documents, celebrities will also inevitably require extremely specific and complicated settlement agreements – even if a valid and uncontested premarital agreement is in place. Each divorce case must end either by trial or through the filing of an agreed-upon judgment. Preparation of the judgment will likely require multiple drafts and settlement conferences between attorneys. Due to the complexity of celebrity divorce cases, it is not uncommon for celebrities to walk away from their marriages with six figure legal bills.
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

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