Nancy J. Bickford

By

Due to the nature of California family law, divorce lawyers have a tough job when it comes to pleasing the client. Many divorce lawyers are proficient practitioners who are skilled in court room advocacy, preparing appropriate pleadings, and getting people divorced. However, at the end of a family law case, both parties walk away from each other with less than they started with and the emotional strain of separation. Undoubtedly in every divorce case, bank accounts and retirement plans will be divided, debt will be assigned, valuable property will be sold and the parties must figure out a new way of life. Family lawyers often work tirelessly to ease the stress of divorce for the client by attempting to create mutual beneficial solutions for the parties outside of the courtroom.

If the parties cannot reach an agreement on all issues in a divorce case, they must face each other as opponents in trial. Any family law trial is incredibly expensive for both parties to litigate. In fact, many trials can be more costly than the item(s) over which the parties are arguing. Another unfortunate reality about litigation in family law cases is that litigation is often funded by the liquidation of the community assets.

This means that the longer the parties battle on, the more the “pot” left to divide shrinks. After all of the arguments, hearings, and trials are over, the parties may not have any assets left to share. In order to avoid that outcome, family law attorneys work to help the client consider the cost-benefit analysis for each dispute.

Family law litigants often become frustrated with the settlement process in cases where one spouse remains firm in his or her positions and is unwilling to compromise on any issue. In these cases, the spouse who is willing to engage in “back and forth” settlement offers may feel cornered and vulnerable. The cooperative spouse will likely see no other option than to yield to every demand of the unreasonable party.The only alternative is a lengthy, expensive and draining trial. The emotional and financial cost of trial is rarely worth a potentially successful outcome. This problem is only compounded when the spouse and his/her attorney are confident they will prevail if a disputed issue is litigated; however, they must rescind their position to preserve the community estate.

There are many opportunities throughout the divorce process for parties to reach a settlement on disputed issues. If child custody and/or visitation are involved in the case, the parties are required to attend mediation at Family Court Services. A mediator will work with both parties and attempt to create a mutually agreed upon custody and child sharing arrangement.

In addition, before any issue proceeds to trial, the parties are required to attend a Mandatory Settlement Conference (“MSC“). At the MSC, a family law expert will work with the parties in an attempt to settle all issues which could potentially go to trial. Both of these services are provided without charge for family law litigants. WCENY8KDWAEH Continue reading

By

A divorce almost always results in a change in housing for one or both spouses. As if qualifying for a new mortgage isn’t hard enough, unfortunately, getting a mortgage after a divorce can be further complicated by several factors related to the dissolution. During a divorce proceeding, family lawyers frequently answer the question:

“How do I get a mortgage after a divorce?”

Mortgage lenders look at your overall debt-to-income ratio to see what you quality for. Thus, it is important to keep in mind that the following liabilities will be considered as part of your ability to qualify for a mortgage:

  • Child and Spousal Support Obligations:
    Lenders will look for any undisclosed financial obligations such as the payment of child support or spousal support pursuant to the divorce decree. These financial obligations will, unfortunately, reduce your ability to qualify for a mortgage because they are looked at as debts, which reduce your income.
  • Credit card debt, student loans, and automobile loans: These liabilities will also be considered as part of your ability to qualify for a mortgage unless you are able to prove that your ex-spouse is responsible for the credit obligation by showing twelve months of canceled checks or bank statements.

Although getting a mortgage after divorce can be complicated by the above factors, with some extra planning, discipline and awareness, it surely is not impossible. Here are some tips to help make it easier to get a mortgage after divorce:

  • Disclose receipt of child support and/or spousal support: The income received as child support and/or spousal support pursuant to your divorce decree can be used to help you qualify for a mortgage.
  • Carefully review your credit report: Make sure the accounts on your credit report belong to you only, not jointly with your ex-spouse. This can be quite a process and time some time to sort through but it is worth it because, for instance, if your ex-spouse pays a debt (pursuant to the divorce decree) late that is on your credit report, it will negatively affect your credit score and make it harder to qualify for a mortgage.
  • Provide evidence that ex-spouse is responsible for current mortgage: You can improve your ability to qualify for a new mortgage if you own a house and are currently on a mortgage with your ex-spouse but the divorce decree awards the home to your ex-spouse and he/she is willing to provide evidence that they make the mortgage payments on the home.

Continue reading

By

The date of a premarital agreement (commonly referred to as a “prenup”) will determine the law applicable to its enforcement and validity. The law related to the validity and enforcement of premarital agreements has changed substantially throughout the past 30 years. Divorce attorneys are frequently asked the question:

“Is my prenup valid?”

Any premarital agreement executed after January 1, 1986 is subject to the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (UPAA). However, prior law continues to govern any pre-1986 premarital agreements. In 2002, portions of the UPAA were significantly amended. Again, those changes do not apply retroactively so the 1986 version of the UPAA applies to all premarital agreements executed between January 1, 1986 and January 1, 2002. So, considering all of these timelines, the following is a list of differences to examine:

Premarital Agreement Executed Between 1/1/1986 and 1/1/2002

  • Relaxed statutory disclosure standards – Spouses are held to a lower duty to make a fair, reasonable, and full disclosure regarding property or financial obligations
  • Burden of proof – The party claiming the premarital agreement is unenforceable bears the burden of proof on that contention.
  • Representation of counsel – No requirement that party against whom enforcement is sought was represented by an attorney at the time the premarital agreement was executed.
  • Waiting period – No mandatory waiting period between presentation of premarital agreement to a party and the date it is signed.
  • Spousal Support Waiver – Relaxed statutory requirements applied to spousal support waiver.

Premarital Agreement Executed Between 1/1/2002 and the present

  • Heightened statutory disclosure standards
  • Burden of proof – Burden shifts to party attempting to enforce the premarital agreement to prove it was executed voluntarily.
  • Representation of Counsel – Party against whom enforcement is sought must have been represented by independent counsel or signed an express waiver of representation in a separate document.
  • Waiting period – There must be at least seven days between the date a party is first presented with the premarital agreement and the date it is signed.
  • Spousal Support Waiver – A spousal support waiver in a premarital agreement must meet strict statutory standards in order to be enforceable.

Continue reading

By

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted on September 21, 1996 and permitted the states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages legally entered into in other states. This means that under DOMA, if a same-sex couple who legally married in Hawaii moved to California, California would not be required to recognize the marriage and provide state benefits otherwise provided to married couples. In June 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States declared DOMA unconstitutional. In the aftermath of that landmark decision many same-sex couples are questioning whether they will receive any retroactive relief for the various benefits they were deprived of for nearly seventeen years.

New York legalized same-sex marriage in June 2011 and extended equal rights under estate tax law to legally married same-sex couples in July that same year. Estate tax rights were even extended to those married in other states before New York legalized same-sex marriage. However, federal laws prevented New York from implementing any retroactive application of the estate tax law. This problem came to light when Edie Windsor sued the IRS for denial of her right to inherit granted to other married couples. In 2009, Edie paid $363,000 in federal taxes upon the death of her spouse. As their marriage was not federally recognized under the tax code, she was unable to reap estate tax benefits available to married couples. The Supreme Court held Edie was entitled to a tax refund.Similarly, since Massachusetts issued the first marriage license in the United States to a same-sex couple in 2004, wedded same-sex couples have been unable to file joint federal tax returns. Although a same-sex couple may be married under the laws of their home state, they were unable to claim any federal tax benefits. Now that such federal tax laws have been overturned, same-sex couples question whether they can retroactively realize federal tax benefits back to the date of their marriage.

In general, a tax refund can be claimed within three years of filing the incorrect tax return or within two years of the overpayment. Under this common rule, same-sex married couples may be able to collect overpaid taxes for the past three tax years. Some have rumored that the IRS will extend this typical statue of limitations to allow same-sex married couples to collect tax refunds even further back.

Continue reading

By

In January 2009, Madonna and Guy Ritchie finalized their divorce after eight years of marriage. At the time of their split, many rumors surfaced regarding an acrimonious divorce and possible affairs. Madonna is often cited as the source of the “adoption trend” for celebrities. In fact, as a mother of four children, Madonna only has one biological child with Ritchie, their son Rocco. In July 2013, Ritchie had his bar mitzvah at the Kabbalah Centre in New York City. Despite any lingering bitterness between Madonna and Ritchie, both parents attended their son’s bar mitzvah and behaved admirably. Continue reading

By

One of the biggest battles in many contested divorce cases is the issue of spousal support (also commonly referred to as alimony) and analysis of California spousal support factors. The most prominent factors a court typically considers when making a spousal support award are the supported spouse’s needs and the supporting spouse’s ability to pay support. Therefore, the supported spouse wants to make sure the court considers every single source of income the supporting spouse has available for support. The supporting spouse wants to minimize his/her income as much as possible without misleading the Court or the other party. One issue that has been litigated in California courts is whether fringe benefits or “perks” received through employment are income available when calculating support.

Many companies offer alternative compensation or perks to employees such as car allowances, cell phones, business meals, and company-provided day care. Parties and attorneys often debate whether these “non-cash” perks should be considered income from which the supporting spouse can pay support. Under California law, perks can be considered as income available for support if the benefit is not being divided as an asset and it has an economic value which can be added to the spouse’s income for the purposes of support calculation.

Learn more about division of property in divorceIn cases where a benefit will directly reduce the supporting spouse’s monthly expenses, divorce attorneys will argue that it should be considered as income for support purposes. For example, if the supporting party’s employer pays for his/her cell phone every month and the cell phone is not limited to company use, the supporting party will not have to pay monthly cell phone premiums for personal use of a cell phone.

Likewise, if a company pays for the supporting party’s gas or auto insurance, the supporting party will not pay those expenses out of pocket. In these situations, the fringe benefit will likely be valued and included as income available for support.

Another major issue of contention in this area of law is whether the value the benefit assessed should be considered “taxable” or “non-taxable” income. According to the divorce attorneys at the firm, one California case holds that tangible benefits should be included as taxable income. However, until the employee actually pays taxes on such benefits it is unfair to consider them as gross deductions.In addition, some benefits such as a business meal may not reflect the cost of a normal meal. The supporting spouse may get to eat a $50.00 lunch on the company’s dime; however, if he/she had bought their own lunch, he/she would likely have spent less than $10.00. The court will use discretion in considering a request from a party or divorce attorney to categorize these types of benefits as income where the result might seem unreasonable.

Read more about the effect of divorce on taxes and finances

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a San Diego spousal support calculator, and analysis of the factors affecting spousal support in California is complicated. Often times, a person will need to rely on the advice of an experienced and knowledgeable divorce lawyer in order to understand the theories and process involved.
Continue reading

By

When people think of “divorce”, they don’t often associate it with the term “amicable”, which means to be “characterized by friendly good will” or “peaceable” (definition courtesy of Merriam-Webster). Thus, “amicable divorce” may seem like quite an oxymoron. However, it is often advantageous to everyone involved if the divorce can be achieved and in a somewhat amicable fashion.

There are several things that both parties can do to overcome the major pitfalls to an amicable divorce, three of which are discussed below. In doing so, both parties are more likely to avoid the high cost, painful feelings, and adversarial aspects that are part of a litigated divorce.Often times, divorcing spouses see the divorce process as a means for revenge and thus an instrument to hurt the other spouse. However, the problem with this approach is that it usually causes the other side to respond in the same manner, thus escalating everyone’s emotions involved. The “blame game” for instance tends to increase tension and prolong the divorce process. Although it is important to recognize that feeling exists, an amicable divorce is more likely achieved when both parties attempt to minimize the role that emotions play in a divorce. Divorce attorneys frequently must advise their clients with respect to this issue.A divorce is essentially about business. Thus, an amicable divorce is best achieved when both parties can openly discuss the terms of the “business”. Communication requires open disclosure regarding assets and liabilities. The more open the parties are with each other, the less likely the attorneys are to be required to seek information through the “discovery process“. The best divorce attorneys regularly work with their clients to facilitate communication between the parties.Efforts to minimize emotions and maximize communication both begin with the delivery of the divorce papers. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or legal separation, the moving party must, among other requirements, serve the responding party with a Summons and a Petition for Dissolution. Being served with these papers often incites a tremendous amount of fear, anger and confusion. Thus, it is advisable that the person filing for divorce consider discussing the divorce with his/her spouse prior to actually filing the documents. This will likely minimize the “initial blow” associated with being served with divorce documents.

Implementing the above strategies does not mean that you always have to give up on important issues. Rather, it means that you and your soon to be ex-spouse are willing to work things out in a fair and cooperative manner so that you both end up with an agreement that works for everyone. Despite efforts to achieve an amicable divorce, the divorce process can be quite complicated, especially in San Diego.
Continue reading

By

For divorce attorneys in San Diego, one of the most hotly contested issues is typically spousal support. At the end of a divorce case, the parties must agree to a spousal support amount (even if that amount is zero) or have the judge rule on the issue. Spousal support tends to be a contested issue because the law in this area is very subjective and leaves the judge broad discretion to make a fair and just award. In comparison, child support is easier to reach an agreement on because the court is bound by guideline rules and therefore a judge’s ruling is much more predicable. Many parties opt to agree to an amount rather than battle it out and incur significant legal fees and costs.

When making a spousal support award at the end of a divorce case, the court must consider a laundry list of factors outlined in Family Code § 4320. These factors focus mostly on the relative income and assets of the parties. The judge will use information regarding the income and assets of the parties to determine each party’s ability to pay support and/or need for support. Another important consideration for this analysis is the marital standard of living. A court will not usually make an award of spousal support which would increase the standard of living of the supported spouse above the marital lifestyle. The marital standard of living is sometimes referred to a “glass ceiling” for spousal support.

In contrast, if one spouse has increased earnings post-separation, the children are entitled to share in those greater earnings. Therefore, child support will not be capped based on any standard of living. A problem presents, however, when the supported spouse receives significant child support which may increase his/her own standard of living beyond what he/she experienced during marriage. In a 2006 California case, the court held that child support is properly considered as income available to the supported spouse to satisfy the marital standard of living.

This seems to be a logical result because the supported spouse is not likely keeping all of the child support received in a separate account and only applying it towards the children’s expenses or the children’s “share” of household bills. Courts do not keep tabs on parents receiving child support to ensure every dollar is used for the sole benefit of the children. In fact, in previous cases the Court found use of child support funds specifically for the receiving parent’s own benefit as a proper use of child support. Although only one case is currently “on the books” regarding this issue, as the law stands, it is proper to ask a court to consider child support as income available to a supported spouse to meet and marital standard of living in a spousal support case.

Continue reading

By

Family law is one of the most emotional and sensitive areas of law. Tensions can run high when child custody, visitation, support, and even domestic violence are involved in a divorce in California. The importance of what is at stake in a family law case can sometimes cause litigants to retaliate against their spouses outside of the family law courtroom. Often in family law, one spouse has greater access to financial resources than the other. In order to prevent bullying and harassment in family law when the parties are on unequal financial footing California enacted Family Code § 2030.

Family Code § 2030 states:

“In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage…and in any proceeding subsequent to the entry of a related judgment the Court shall ensure that each party has access to legal representation.”

The goal of Family Code § 2030 is to ensure both parties have equal litigating power in a family law case. This code section dis-incentivizes the party with access to greater financial resources from “burying” the other party with motions or discovery because they will likely be ordered to contribute to the other party’s legal fees based on a “need and ability” analysis. In some cases, three may be one party who has access to significant funds, is an attorney, or works in the legal profession. That party may file lawsuits against his or her spouse in other courts in an attempt to distract or financially drain the other party and avoid Family Code §2030. The question becomes, does the family court have any ability to provide the spouse relief from the unfair tactics employed in other civil courts?

Under Family Code § 2030, the Court has the ability to award attorney fees to one party for expenses incurred in any proceeding related to the prosecution or defense of a divorce case. This has been interpreted by California courts to include civil cases filed against one spouse for the purpose of creating a result in the divorce case. In one California case, Husband filed multiple lawsuits, unrelated to the parties’ divorce, against Wife in a civil court. Wife was forced to spend significant time and funds defending the suits and was unable to properly focus on the parties’ divorce. Wife asked the family court to order Husband to pay the attorney fees she incurred in the civil lawsuits. The family court determined that it had the authority to grant Wife’s request under Family Code § 2030 and ordered Husband to pay her attorney fees.
Continue reading

By

Former NFL player and Super Bowl champ, Jeremy Shockey, and Daniela Cortazar enjoyed a brief eight months of nuptial bliss before Shockey filed for divorce in January 2013. TMZ now reports that Shockey “is playing dumb with his finances according to his soon-to-be ex-wife.” Cortazar claims that Shockey’s net worth is over $15 million but apparently Shockey is pretending to know nothing about his finances in his legal documents. Shockey is even refusing to provide information regarding his net worth. Cortazar is asking a judge to punish Shockey with fines or jail time. More importantly though, to get a fair share in the divorce settlement, Cortazar should take prudent measures to make sure that Shockey doesn’t have any hidden assets tucked away.

Hidden assets are those assets which are not readily visible typically because signs of ownership have been concealed or disguised by the other spouse. Hidden assets typically include liquid assets such as bank accounts, mutual funds, stock and bonds. These types of liquid assets can easily be transferred into another person or entity’s name. Sometimes, these assets are even transferred into accounts in banks offshore which prohibit being touched under the laws of the particular country.

Learn more about divorce and property divisionHidden assets are particularly important in divorce cases because when a court does not know about a particular asset, it cannot properly divide the asset or award it to one party or the other. Hiding assets is clearly illegal because both spouses lawfully have a claim to all marital property during a divorce proceeding. Therefore, being attentive to marital finances can help ensure that your divorce settlement is fair to you.

The first step in hunting down hidden assets during a divorce proceeding requires a diligent tracking and study of all financial records. Looking at old financial statements may help to identify suspicious transactions. For instance, an asset may initially be present in financial documents and then suddenly it has disappeared near the time of divorce or during divorce proceedings.

Other tips on finding hidden assets include the following:

  • Get a credit report on your spouse. Credit reports may contain information regarding financial accounts or credit that are unknown to you.
  • Look for payment of excess income tax and then a subsequent filing for the tax refund after the divorce.
  • Have items such as artwork, hobby equipment, antiques, original paintings, etc. appraised.
  • Be diligent about locating any cash kept as traveler’s checks. You can do this by tracing bank account deposits and withdrawals.
  • Look for any inconsistencies which may indicate delayed disbursements of bonuses or stock options.
  • Be aware of any income that isn’t reflected on either financial statements or tax returns.

Read more about property division and divorce in San Diego


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