At the outset of a divorce, should you clean out the joint account? Or should you refrain from cleaning out the joint account, just to see the account cleaned out by your ex?
CAN WE HELP?OR CALL US AT 651-332-7650
At the outset of a divorce, should you clean out the joint account? Or should you refrain from cleaning out the joint account, just to see the account cleaned out by your ex?
Family law mediation is a forum in which a neutral party (the mediator) meets with parties to help facilitate a settlement of the disputed issues or, in the alternative, to rule out settlement exhaustively, and help the parties reach an impasse. The mediator has no authority to make a decision or impose something upon one of the parties against their will; and the process is confidential.
There are three basic reasons that family law mediation is a good idea.
It is important to note that the latter two reasons are applicable if mediation is unsuccessful, that there is more to proceeding with mediation than getting the case settled. If you appear before the family court for trial, you are likely to be in better standing with the family court judge if the judge knows that the court’s decision is necessary, and the dispute is compelling enough not to have been resolved in mediation. The impasse reached in mediation is more meaningful than the impasse reached when a couple with communication problems stops speaking to each other.
Finally, for purposes of trial preparation, mediation allows the courtroom disputes to be narrowed, and more sharply defined. The confidential communications, while inadmissible in court, do provide some insight about the strengths and weaknesses of your case and the opposing party’s case. The family court judge who decides the case is likely to navigate through similar logic, questions and considerations that play out in the mediation sessions. The trial of a case in which mediate was unsuccessfully attempted is more effective for the parties and the court than a trial proceeding that transpires from “square one.”
When a couple divorces, the personal property must be divided. That includes households goods and furnishings, and general “stuff” in the home. While the division of items can often be a contentious subject, family court judges discourage spouses from devoting too much time and emotion (and expense) to it.
In a divorce, when Spouse A leaves the marital homestead in the hands of Spouse B, typically Spouse B must buy out the marital interest of Spouse A. At least, that is how things used to be, before the current era of the depressed housing market. Today, it is not unusual for Spouse A to leave the house behind,and not to be bought out by Spouse B at all. The departing spouse is likely to be only too happy to leave the mortgage payment behind as well, and to get out from underneath the burden of a big house payment and shrinking home equity.
When divorced or separated parents need to make a decision about where their child or children will attend school in the fall, it can turn into a legal dispute. Regardless of the custodial arrangement that the children live by, it is preferable if the parents can be in agreement about school enrollment. If the parents disagree, then the designation as to legal custody may be important. Parents with joint legal custody share the authority to make a decision about school enrollment. If each parent with joint legal custody has a different school arrangement in mind for the child, then the issue likely needs to be resolved by the family court or a parenting neutral.
Unfortunately, in many instances, the family court judge would rather not make a decision without the input of a parenting neutral, and there may not be time before the beginning of the school year for a parenting neutral to investigate the situation.
When a child’s parents do not share joint legal custody, then there is less likely to be a legal issue regarding school choice. The parents’ disagreement about the choice of school may defer to the decision of the parent with sole legal custody. But the school decision must be made in a manner that is consistent with the best interests of the child.
If the decision is whether to keep the child at the same school, or change the school the child attends, the child is likely to stay attending the same school unless the parents agree to a different school, or there is a compelling reason for the child to change schools over the objection of one of the parents.
When a couple gets divorced, and the divorce decree makes one spouse responsible for credit card debt (or other debt), the other spouse should not have to worry about the credit card company contacting them for payment, right? Wrong. The divorce decree determines rights and responsibilities as between the spouses; but in most circumstances, the divorce decree does not affect the rights of third parties.
So, if the credit card company cannot collect from spouse A, the company may try to get payment from spouse B, even if the divorce decree gives spouse A sole responsibility for the debt. If the credit card company obtains payment from spouse B, spouse B’s recourse is to get relief through the family court in the form of reimbursement from spouse A for the amount the credit card company got from spouse B.
The family court has the authority to grant that relief because, while the credit card company’s collection from spouse B does not technically violate the terms of the decree, spouse A’s default on the debt payment, in effect, does violate the terms of the decree, and the family court can remedy that defect.
When someone’s 401(k) interest is divided in a divorce, neither party must suffer a tax consequence or an early withdrawal penalty. The funds from the 401(k) transferred from one spouse to the other may be rolled over, without consequence, provided that the rollover is completed within sixty days. For example, if spouse A receives $50,000 from spouse B’s 401(k) account pursuant to the terms of the divorce, spouse A may park the funds in a generic bank account temporarily — for instance, while spouse A sets up a new account — but the funds must land in a proper, tax-qualified account within sixty days of the date the funds left spouse B’s 401(k) account.
The receiving spouse may opt against rolling over the funds into a tax-qualified account without paying the early-withdrawal penalty. But the transfer does count as a taxable event during the tax year that the transfer occurs, so the receiving spouse needs to plan accordingly. That is, the receiving spouse would be wise to pay estimated taxes on the transfer.
When someone liquidates funds from an IRA (individual retirement account) before age 59 1/2, there is a ten percent penalty. However, when an IRA is divided between spouses in a divorce, the transfer of funds incident to the divorce are not subject to the early-withdrawal penalty. In order to avoid the penalty, the receiving spouse must roll over the funds into an IRA or other tax-qualified account within sixty days.
The manner in which the 401(k) interest is divided is a court order called a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). The QDRO contains terms that direct the plan administrator in the proper division of the 401(k) account. A QDRO is NOT USED for an IRA transfer. The banks handling an IRA transfer may have specific requirements, such as specific account information for the destination of the transferred funds; but for the IRA transfer, a QDRO is unnecessary.
If a married couple gets divorced, and one of the spouses owned their home before the marriage, the house is part marital property and part nonmarital property.
The value of the house at the time of the divorce can be divided into several categories:
(1) the equity the owning spouse had in the home at the time of the marriage (nonmarital);
(2) the amount the couple paid off on mortgage principal while living together as husband and wife (marital);
(3) the appreciation in the value of the house over the course of the marriage that can be attributed to the owning spouse’s premarital equity (nonmarital);
(4) the appreciation in the value of the house over the course of the marriage that CANNOT be attributed to the owning spouse’s premarital equity (marital); and
(5) the increase in value of the house that can be attributed to home improvements that the parties made during the marriage (marital).
Most of the time, the components of the house’s value cannot be objectively determined or fixed without either the reasonable compromise of the spouses or the expertise of a neutral appraiser.
A new study on children of divorce has been mentioned in recent news headlines. Allen Li, of the Rand Corporation, evaluated children before and after their parents divorced, between 1979 and 2002. The more common methodology of past research had compared children of divorce to children in intact families.
Li’s study drew upon a national sample of more than 6,000 children between ages 4 and 15, whose mothers were surveyed during the term of the study.
The fact that Li interviewed the mothers, but not the fathers, of the children is puzzling. The study is being described as something that could reframe the debate on divorce. There is nothing to suggest that the research lacks validity just because the responses came from mothers only. But the exclusion of fathers from the study is a striking gap.
If this study is considered an improved methodology over past research, it would appear that future research could improve upon this current research by gathering data from both fathers and mothers.
If someone starts a divorce action and then changes their mind about it, then the consequences depend on the intentions of the other spouse. If the other spouse wants the divorce to proceed, then the divorce will proceed. But if the other spouse does NOT want the divorce, then the divorce action is dismissed, and the parties remain married.
As an example, if the husband commences the divorce action by serving a Petition, the wife has the option of serving an Answer and Counter-Petition, or just an Answer. By including the Counter-Petition, the wife is asserting that she wants the divorce to proceed whether the husband changes his mind or not. If the husband withdraws the Petition, then the divorce will proceed on the Counter-Petition. If the wife does not include a Counter-Petition, she is asserting that she does not want the divorce to proceed if the husband changes his mind and withdraws the Petition. In that instance, if the husband withdraws the Petition, there is no action on which to proceed.
If the parties decide to reconcile after the divorce begins, the parties must work together to withdraw the action. And of course, if they decide to reconcile after the divorce is final, then their options are to remarry, or to live happily ever after, together and unmarried.