Nancy J. Bickford

By

Often when non-lawyers imagine going to court they picture themselves being represented by a knowledgeable and experienced attorney. The courtroom and legal system can be intimidating to those unfamiliar with the process because of the immense amount of specific procedures and rules that must be followed. However, despite their inexperience in the legal field, many California spouses are self-represented in their divorce. When a party to a divorce action is not represented by an attorney he or she will be considered “pro per”.

San Diego spouses decide not to retain attorneys in divorce actions for a variety of reasons. One of the most prevalent reasons is the cost. Family law attorneys in San Diego typically charge between $175.00 and $450.00 per hour depending on the experience level of the attorney. Depending on the particular case and the work involved, a spouse’s attorney fee bill can potentially cost tens of thousands of dollars. In order to avoid that cost, many litigants utilize free legal resources available throughout the San Diego community. Unlike in criminal law, family law parties are not entitled to representation. Therefore, there is no “public defender” equivalent in the family law system.

Learn more about jurisdiction and divorce in California

In order to reduce the cost of getting divorced, if the parties are splitting amicably, some divorcing couples will elect to have one spouse hire an attorney to handle all of the formalities. In this type of case, only one of the spouses is represented by the divorce attorney. The attorney will only owe professional duties to their client, not the other spouse. If the parties are in agreement regarding all issues, the attorney can prepare all of the paperwork for an uncontested divorce while the spouses only incurs one set of legal fees.

Another alternative often utilized by San Diego family law litigants is limited scope representation. Spouses can retain an attorney to review work they have done alone on their case. Additionally, parties can hire an attorney to represent them in an important hearing or for one or two issues in the case. If you cannot afford full representation and are worried about the custody and visitation or property issues in your divorce, you may be able to find a divorce attorney willing to handle those limited issues.

Read more about limited scope issues in divorce

Despite the cost of legal representation, it is important to consider what is at stake in a family law case and whether it is worth the risk of self-representation. The consequences of making a mistake in a family law proceeding can be devastating and may persist long-term. Also, it may be prudent to consider the time and effort that is often required in a family law case and whether you will have the ability to miss days of work for court hearings and devote hours to preparation. If you are unsure about whether you want to handle your divorce alone, contact a San Diego family law attorney for a consultation to find out more information.

www.BickfordLaw.com


Continue reading

By

In the summer of 2011 news broke of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s affair with his housekeeper and of the child he had with his mistress. His wife, Maria Shriver, was reportedly devastated and ashamed. As Shriver is a Kennedy and comes from a long line of women who stood by their husbands notwithstanding infidelity, the world waited to see if she would forgive Schwarzenegger. Eventually, two months after Schwarzenegger’s secret life was uncovered, Shriver instructed her attorney to file for divorce.

 

Read more about grounds for divorce in California

 

The former couple reportedly sorted out their financial and custody affairs quickly considering the size of their fortune, an estimated $400 million. Schwarzenegger and Shriver were married for twenty five years. Considering the substantial length of the marriage it is likely that the $400 million is all community property. Community property consists of all assets and earnings accumulated by the parties between the date of marriage and the date of separation. As divorce attorneys will advise their clients, unless a premarital or prenuptial agreement is in place all community property is divided equally between the parties. As the principles of community property are clearly set forth in the family code, Schwarzenegger and Shriver likely did not have much to argue about when it came to settlement.

Although all of the necessary issues have been resolved in the Schwarzenegger-Shriver divorce, the two are still married. A divorce is not final until a Judgment of Dissolution is entered by the court. A Judgment of Dissolution can be entered pursuant to a Marital Settlement Agreement entered into by the parties voluntarily or by court ordered pursuant to a trial on all disputed issues. Thus far, neither Schwarzenegger nor Shriver has instructed their divorce attorneys to take the final step to file their agreement with the court and have a Judgment entered. There are a few lines of speculation regarding why the couple has not made their divorce official.

 

Read more about finalizing a divorce in California

 

It is rumored that Shriver is struggling with her Catholic faith and its prohibition on divorce. Some guess that the parties are in no hurry to finalize their paperwork because they have enough money such that remaining legally married has little to no effect on their daily lives. However, the most popular theory is that Schwarzenegger and Shriver still love each other and are hesitating to end their marriage until they are certain they won’t reconcile. Schwarzenegger has publicly expressed his regret for how he treated his wife and children in the past and was optimistic that he and Shriver would be together again. Rumors surfaced as recently as March 2012 that the parties were attending couple’s counseling together.

Continue reading

By

Is it possible to go after my ex-husband’s new wife’s income in order to increase his child support obligation? This question probably comes across a divorcée’s mind more often than not. Unfortunately, if your ex-husband remarries, you will most likely be unsuccessful in pursuing his new wife’s income as family law courts have proven to be quite reluctant to include a new spouse’s income for purposes of calculating child support. The court’s logic behind this is that the payment of child support should be the parent’s obligation rather than that of the new spouse.

Prior to 1994, courts had authority and discretion to consider a subsequent spouse’s income when setting a child support award. However, as San Diego divorce attorneys know, when an ex-spouse remarries, child support adjustments are now governed by Family Code Section 4057.5. This statute prohibits courts from considering a subsequent spouse’s income unless the exclusion of the subsequent spouse’s income would cause the child to suffer extreme and severe hardship. In other words, if you are the parent seeking to modify the child support order after your ex-husband has remarried, then you should attempt to prove that the child would suffer an extreme and severe hardship if the earnings of your ex-husband’s new wife were excluded in considering an award for child support. Thus, courts look exclusively to the needs of the child.Pursuant to Family Code Section 4057.5 (b), an extraordinary situation that might constitute an “extreme and severe hardship” is where the ex-spouse voluntarily or intentionally quits working or intentionally remains unemployed or underemployed and relies on his subsequent spouse’s income. Such a situation would warrant consideration of all of the community property of ex-husband and his subsequent spouse in modifying the ex-husband’s child support obligation.

Read more about child and spousal support

As an aside, seeking to modify child support by attempting to include the subsequent spouse’s income, might in fact backfire and actually reduce the child support award instead. For instance, if your ex-husband remarries and his new wife makes a considerable amount of money, then he will likely be in a higher tax bracket (if married filing jointly), thereby reducing the amount of his disposable income. In turn, this will then likely reduce the amount of child support that your ex-husband has to pay. However, it is likely that such a decrease would only be a minimal amount each month, depending on how much his subsequent spouse makes. Nevertheless, the subsequent spouse’s income certainly won’t increase your husband’s child support obligation unless the “extreme and severe hardship” exception is met.
Continue reading

By

Charlie Sheen, a regular news-maker in California family law, has four children from his two prior marriages. Two twin boys with ex-wife Brooke Mueller and two girls with ex-wife Denise Richards. After all the dust settled from his two divorces, Sheen’s twin boys ended up in the custody of Denise Richards. This unusual custody arrangement worked well for all of the parties. Richards was happy to care for Mueller and Sheen’s children because it gave her girls a chance to grow up with their half siblings. Mueller agreed to the arrangement because she has been struggling with addiction and is unable to properly care for the twins. Recently Mueller changed her mind about the current custody arrangement and her family lawyers sought a modification from the family court.

On Wednesday May 15th, Mueller, Sheen and Richards appeared before a family court judge to litigate Mueller’s request to modify custody. Mueller proposed the children be removed from Richards’s custody and placed with her brother. When Richards and her family lawyers opposed the request, Mueller accused her of caring for the children for her own financial benefit. If Mueller or her brother had custody of the twins, Mueller would be entitled to $55,000 per month in child support from Sheen. According to her declaration signed under penalty of perjury, Richards refused any money from Sheen to support the twins. She also stated that she did not want any money in the future to help her care for the boys. In light of this evidence, Mueller’s argument lost all of its bite and the judge flatly refused her request.

In any California custody case the paramount concern for the Court is the best interest of the child. As a stable lifestyle is usually in the child’s best interest, family court judges will always carefully consider any request to uproot young children. Mueller and her attorneys requested her four-year-old twins be removed from their home where they live with their siblings and be placed in the custody of a different caretaker. This traumatic change would likely take a great emotional toll on the children. Unless there is good cause to do so, judges will make an effort not to uproot children from a stable environment.

Although it is not realistic to expect all parents to come to an agreement regarding custody and visitation, it is typically in the best interest of the children if the parents can work together to come up with a mutually beneficial solution to their custody disputes. Throughout San Diego there are plenty of private and public custody mediators available to parents who need help cooperating for the benefit of their children.
Continue reading

By

In a divorce, personal property (such as furniture, furnishings, art, family photos, pets, and other general property) is treated no differently than the division of other assets. Parties to a divorce can spend a significant amount of money fighting over silverware and lamps by placing a dollar figure on each item and dealing with them as part of the general division of assets and debts. If there is a dispute over which furniture or furnishing each party wants, the personal property will usually be appraised and then the appraiser will make a list of all of the personal property and assign dollar values to everything. As divorce attorneys will advise their clients, at that point the judge will make a determination as to how everything will be divided.

Or, instead of litigating the division of personal property, a better (i.e. less expensive) way to deal with the division might just be for the parties to agree on who takes what piece of furniture/dishes/artwork, etc. There are several ways that divorce attorneys approach an equitable division of furniture and furnishings, including, but not limited to the following methods:

  • Alternate Pick Method – personal property is divided by alternating picks after the flip of a coin to determine which party to the divorce will pick first.
  • Alternate Pick Method by Room – together the parties itemize everything in each room and then the parties alternate picks for the contents of the entire room.
  • Sale and Split – sell everything and split the proceeds between the parties upon divorce.
  • List and Choose – One person prepares two lists placing everything to be split in the divorce on one list or the other; then the other person picks which list he or she wants.
  • Bidding – each person submits a sealed bid as to what they think the item is worth and then the person with the higher bid gets the item at that value (i.e. at a charge).
  • Appraisal – Hire an appraiser and then divide everything based on the appraiser’s values. This usually requires the use of one of the above ways to divide the property once it is valued.

Although there are a variety of methods of dividing household items in a divorce, family photos generally fall under their own category of division. Typically, the parties agree for family photos to be given to one party and the other party to have the option to make copies of all of the photos. Courts usually do not like to get into disputes over family photos since there is really no way to assign a financial value to original photos.
Continue reading

By

In a San Diego divorce, a party’s date of separation is the first date when either party subjectively (mentally) decided the marriage was over, finished, and not salvageable. The parties’ overt actions usually demonstrate that subjective frame of mind. For instance, there can’t be ongoing marriage counseling to save the marriage after the date of separation. The date of separation of the parties to a divorce can be a hotly contested issue. Sometimes, when parties do not agree on the date that they separated, the court must step in to help.

In fact, it is quite common for divorcing spouses to disagree about when their date of separation is. These disagreements are usually financially motivated since California is a community property state. This means that in California, community property rights only accrue from the date of marriage until the date of separation. Thus, the date of separation can significantly affect the size of the divisible community estate during a divorce. Some legal, financial, and other practical considerations for the parties to keep in mind when considering divorce and arriving at a date of separation (by way of agreement or decided by the Court) include the following:

  • Stock options: Divorce attorneys will advise their clients that a later date of separation will usually give the community more interest in a stock option.
  • Post-separation bonuses: A later date of separation will give the community a greater interest in a post-separation bonus upon divorce.
  • Pensions: A later date of separation in a divorce will give the community more interest in a pension.
  • Spousal support: A later date of separation from your spouse may provide for more spousal support. The duration of the marriage is one of the twelve factors a California court will weigh in determining the amount and duration of permanent spousal support.
  • Value of a business: A later date of separation in a San Diego divorce will value a sole practitioner’s business at a later date.
  • Pereira or Van Kamp considerations: If the separate property business was brought into the marriage, the community’s interest would stop growing at the date of separation.

The implications of the date of separation in a divorce can be quite significant. With the above considerations in mind, if for example Husband is the primary breadwinner and Wife is a stay-at-home mom, Wife may want to establish a later date of separation in order to maximize the community estate. Husband, on the other hand, may want to establish an earlier date of separation for the divorce so that his income, bonuses, commissions, etc. earned after the date of separation will be characterized as his separate property instead of community property. Clearly, selecting the date of separation can be a complicated matter that may require the advice of an experienced divorce attorney.

www.BickfordLaw.com


Continue reading

By

Spousal support is an issue commonly litigated in a divorce in San Diego. Carol Abar filed for divorce after sixteen years of marriage, when she learned that her husband had sexually assaulted her daughter. In a hearing on spousal support (commonly referred to as alimony in San Diego), a California family court ordered Ms. Abar to pay $1,300 per month in support to her daughter’s abuser. Although Ms. Abar presented evidence to the court that her husband molested her daughter for years, the court determined that an award of spousal support was appropriate in the divorce case based on the parties’ relative income.

In 2012, Ms. Abar’s ex-husband, Ed Abar, plead guilty to the rape of her daughter and was sentenced to approximately one year in jail. At that time, Ms. Abar had paid about $22,000 in spousal support. While Mr. Abar served his sentence, the family court temporarily stopped payment of support. Recently, Mr. Abar was released and is now requesting $33,000 in arrears. Mr. Abar is also requesting the court to order Ms. Abar to resume support payments.

Learn more about divorce and family support

It is clear that such a spousal support award is an outrageous miscarriage of justice. In order to tighten the gaps in the California Family Code which may allow perpetrators of domestic violence to collect spousal support, Governor Jerry Brown signed more stringent legislation last year. As divorce attorneys in San Diego are aware, if at the end of a case either party has requested spousal support, the court will weigh 14 factors which are listed in Family Code §4320. Upon consideration of these factors, the court will determine how much spousal support to award in a divorce case, if any. Family Court judges were always required to consider documented history of domestic violence between the parties to the divorce, and were also required to consider criminal conviction of an abusive spouse in making a decision. However, the new legislation added a different twist to those old provisions.

Newly enacted Family Code §4324.5 states that “in any dissolution of marriage where there is a criminal conviction for a violent sexual felony…an award of spousal support to the convicted spouse from the injured spouse is prohibited”. This code section applies as long as the divorce is filed within 5 years of the conviction, time served, end of probation or end of parole. Now, a San Diego family court judge will have no discretion to make an award of spousal support in a divorce matter where the supporting spouse was a victim of a violent sexual felony perpetrated by his or her spouse.

Read more about spousal support from the divorce attorneys at the firm

Despite this added layer of protection for spouses, currently there is no family code provision preventing child abusers from receiving spousal support. The family code has evolved since the first support order was made in the Abar divorce case, but it seems that it will not be able to offer Ms. Abar any relief from her obligation to support her ex-husband.

www.BickfordLaw.com


Continue reading

By

Back in September 2012, Jason Aldean was caught kissing previous American Idol contestant, turned NBA-cheerleader, Brittany Kerr. However, this kiss turned into quite the smooching scandal considering Aldean has been married for over 11 years to teenage-sweetheart, Jessica Ussery. Not surprisingly, Aldean recently filed for divorce in Tennessee. TMZ reports that the couple cited “irreconcilable differences” as the reason for the split.

As San Diego attorneys know, one of the only two grounds for divorce here in California is “irreconcilable differences (see website page entitled “Grounds for Divorce or Legal Separation” for more details on both “irreconcilable differences” and “incurable insanity”). It is quite common for divorcing couples to cite “irreconcilable differences” as their reason for their divorce, but what really constitutes an “irreconcilable difference”? Is it more than just one spouse cheating on the other?

Read more about divorce and irreconcilable differences

Although infidelity alone may seem like a pretty good reason for divorce, such infidelity must lead to “irreconcilable differences” between the couple since California is a no-fault state. (See website page entitled “Grounds for Divorce or Legal Separation” for more details on “no-fault”). In general, “irreconcilable differences means that the spouses can no longer agree on basic, fundamental issues involving the marriage and that they will never agree, such that there is no chance of reconciliation. Thus, when a divorce is based on “irreconcilable differences,” any past cheating scandal by one spouse doesn’t matter, what matters is that one or both spouses agree that the marriage won’t work any longer and that it’s clear to a judge that there is no chance that the marriage can be saved.

Learn the answers to frequently asked questions about divorce in San Diego

There is no black-letter list of what constitutes “irreconcilable differences.” Rather, it is a quite vague standard and San Diego Family Courts often broadly interpret “irreconcilable differences”. Some of factors that San Diego courts may look at to determine if there has been a marriage breakdown may include: 1) difference of interests; 2) long physical separation; 3) antagonistic feelings that are irreversible; 4) resentment; 5) distrust; 6) financial difficulties affecting the marriage; 7) conflict of personality; and 8) lack of mutual concern for emotional needs of each other.Although Aldean has urged everyone not to cast judgment on his recent filing for divorce, one can only assume that Aldean’s smooching scandal with Kerr likely led to distrust, resentment and irreversible antagonistic feelings between Aldean and Ussery, thus leading to what a court will likely interpret to constitute “irreconcilable differences”.

Continue reading

By

Although we are located in California, and primarily represent clients in divorce in San Diego, sometimes family law decisions made in other states are noteworthy. Recently, Florida lawmakers discussed putting a stop to spousal support awards extending beyond half the length of the marriage, even for long term marriages. There was a divorce law before Governor Rick Scott which would have generally prohibited payments from lasting beyond half of the length of the marriage. The proposed bill also gave family courts power to adjust current spousal support orders or agreements extending beyond the specified limits. In addition to containing provisions regarding support, the Florida law would have also imposed different custody and visitation laws which would have required the court to award equal custody in most cases.

As San Diego divorce attorneys are aware, there are two types of spousal support: temporary and permanent. In California, spousal support is commonly referred to as alimony. Spousal support is called “temporary” if it is awarded at any time before the final resolution of a case by agreement or trial. Spousal support is called “permanent” if it is awarded at the end of the case pursuant to a judgment. The length of the paying spouse’s permanent support obligation following divorce depends on a number of factors, particularly the length of the marriage. Thus, “permanent” spousal support is a misnomer that divorce lawyers frequently are asked to clarify, because it can be set with an expiration date or be terminated.

Learn more about divorce and spousal support from the lawyers at the firm

Although San Diego family court judges are far from predictable, generally if a marriage is “short term”, the paying spouse will only be obligated to make spousal support payments for half of the length of the marriage. In divorce, usually any marriage under ten years is considered a “short term” marriage and any marriage over ten years is considered a “long term” marriage. There is no limit currently in place pursuant to California family law that limits the length of a spousal support obligation arising out of a long term marriage. In some cases, a spouse may pay spousal support for the same duration of the marriage or longer.Although Florida’s Governor vetoed the bill on May 1, it is not the only state considering eliminating any true “permanent” alimony. Currently, Massachusetts has adopted a similar bill and twenty other states are also in the process of drafting their own. If California were to pass such a law, spouses currently paying support past the “half of the length of the marriage” mark may consider consulting with a divorce attorney, and may head back to court to terminate their current obligation. Those opposed to this alimony reform argue that it flies against the best interest of children and families. Some believe that the law is “anti-woman” as men are ordered to pay spousal support more often than women under traditional stereotypes.

Continue reading

By

The U.S. peered into the private lives of Jamie and Frank McCourt, owners of the Dodgers, as they publicly litigated their contentious divorce in California. The former couple’s dispute over ownership of the California baseball team resulted in what is rumored to be one of the world’s most expensive divorces. After substantial attorney fees and costs were racked up throughout the proceeding, the McCourt’s reached a divorce settlement in October 2011.

In consideration for relinquishing any rights to the Dodgers, Ms. McCourt received $131 million tax-free in addition to several expensive pieces of real property. Despite receiving what seems like an enormous amount of money, Ms. McCourt and her divorce attorney now want the settlement thrown out as the Dodgers were later sold for $2 billion. Assuming the Dodgers were a community property asset, Ms. McCourt settled for $770 million less than she would have received if the proceeds of the sale were divided equally.

Read more about property division and divorce in California

The basis of Ms. McCourt’s request to set aside the Marital Settlement Agreement is fraud. She argues that her former husband deliberately misled her regarding the true value of the Dodgers. At a recent court hearing, Mr. McCourt’s divorce lawyers argued that Ms. McCourt is not entitled to set aside the settlement because she willingly agreed its terms and her recent claims are baseless. If the judge agrees with Ms. McCourt and sets aside the judgment, the parties and their attorneys will re-litigate all issues related to the Dodgers. The court will have to determine, under California family law provisions, whether the Dodgers were community property or the separate property of Mr. McCourt. Prior to settlement, the court determined that the parties’ post-marital agreement giving Mr. McCourt full ownership of the Dodgers was invalid.As divorce attorneys will advise their clients, under the California Family Code, the commission of perjury on the Final Declaration of Disclosure is a legal basis to set aside a judgment. At the end of each divorce case in San Diego, the parties are required to complete a Final Declaration of Disclosure, unless a proper waiver is effectuated. The Final Declaration of Disclosure is a series of forms, which are signed under the penalty of perjury, on which the parties list the value of all assets.

Learn more about fiduciary duty in divorce

Ms. McCourt’s attorney argues that she relied on the most recent figures presented to her in accepting the settlement. If Mr. McCourt in fact lied on those forms, Ms. McCourt may be able to set aside their judgment subject to statute of limitation requirements. The court has the ability to limit the set aside only to those portions of the agreement which were materially affected by the nondisclosure. In this case, only the portions related to the Dodgers would be addressed.

www.BickfordLaw.com


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