Articles Posted in California

If you open up a fresh copy of the 2014 Family Law Code and do some heavy reading, you might notice the modifications to Section 3040, 4057, 7601, and 8617 as well as the addition of Section 4052.5. Back in October 2013 new legislation was signed which now allows California Courts to recognize that children can have more than two legal parents. Although conservative groups viewed this new legislation as an attack on the traditional family structure, the purpose of these new and modified sections is to address changes in family structure that are often present in California. These include the “not so uncommon anymore” situation of a same-sex couple having a child with a biological parent of the opposite sex.

The basis for the legislation apparently arose as a reaction to a 2011 court decision (In re M.C (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 197) that involved a same-sex couple who ended their relationship for a brief amount of time. One of the women conceived a child with a man (and began raising that child with the man) prior to resuming her relationship with the other woman, whom she ended up marrying shortly thereafter. After a fight put one of the women in the hospital and the other in jail, the child was sent to foster care because although all three adults seemed to meet the criteria to be a legal parent of the child, the biological father did not have parental rights under the law at the time. The court reasoned that it was prohibited from recognizing that more than two people may claim a right to parentage.

In response to the Court’s ruling in In re M.C., the Family Code was modified to give Courts the authority to expand the interpretation of the parent and child relationship. Specifically, Family Code Section 7601 provides that Courts are not precluded from making “a finding that a child has a parent and child relationship with more than two parents.”Allowing the Courts to recognize that a child may have three or more legal parents is quite significant for purposes allocating custody and financial responsibility during and after a dissolution proceeding. With regard to the allocation of custody and visitation, Family Code Section 3040 has also been modified to provide for the following: “In cases where a child has more than two parents, the court shall allocate custody and visitation among the parents based on the best interest of the child, including, but not limited to, addressing the child’s need for continuity and stability by preserving established patterns of care and emotional bonds. The court may order that not all parents share legal or physical custody of the child if the court finds that it would not be in the best interest of the child as provided in Sections 3011 and 3020.” [emphasis added].

As a result of this modification, Courts have the ability to prevent children from being separated from an adult that he or she has always known as a “parent” simply because of a technicality in the law. This modified section allows Courts to place the interest of the children first by giving them the authority to protect children from the emotional and psychological impact of being separated from one of his or her parents. Thus, rather than having to place a child in foster care, the Courts are now able to consider the presence of someone who has played a vital parental role in the child’s life.
Continue reading

In a recent divorce between Black Keys’ singer, Dan Auerbach, and his former wife, Stephanie Gonis, the parties divided an unusual asset – a lock of Bob Dylan’s hair. This is a perfect example of the family law principle that all property must be divided upon dissolution. In the Auerbach-Gonis divorce, the parties owned a variety of typical assets such as real property, vehicles, and cash; however, all property – including valuable locks of hair must be divided at the time of judgment.

In the beginning of each divorce case, the parties are required to disclose and characterize all property either party has an interest in. “Property” is defined in California Civil Code Section 654 as, “the ownership of a thing is the right of one or more persons to possess and use it to the exclusion of others…the thing of which there may be ownership is called property”. Property can be further characterized as “real” property and “personal” property. Generally in dissolution proceedings, real estate (including the marital residence and vacation homes) are the only “real” property divided. All other property is generally “personal” property.Ultimately Gonis was awarded Bob Dylan’s hair pursuant to the Auerbach-Gonis judgment. According to the California Family Code and applicable California case law, the community estate must be divided equally between the parties. The community estate consists of all the community property acquired by the parties from the date of marriage to the date of separation. In some circumstances, although the estate as a whole can be divided equally in terms of the value each party receives, all assets may not be divisible. It is important to note that all property, including the separate property of both spouses, must be disclosed. Separate property is defined all property acquired by either spouse prior to marriage, after separation, or during marriage by gift, bequest, or devise. If property is determined to be the separate property of one spouse, that property will be confirmed to that spouse in the final judgment without offset for its value.

In a case where a community asset cannot simply be divided in half and distributed to the parties, such as a lock of hair, the parties will have two options. First, the parties can agree on the value of the indivisible item and offset the division of other assets to account for one party receiving the asset in full. Second, the parties can agree to sell the indivisible item and split the proceeds equally. If an asset is easily divisible, such as the funds in a bank account, the parties can each take one-half of the asset without the need for a valuation or sale.
Continue reading

In a recent controversial New Jersey case, Rachel Canning filed a lawsuit against her parents requesting child support. Canning, a high school senior, alleges her parents kicked her out of their house after she turned 18 years old. Through her attorney, Canning is requesting financial support and an order for her parents to pay her college tuition. Canning’s parents dispute her allegations that she was forced out of their home and argue that Canning left home voluntarily. Apparently a dispute arose between Canning and her parents regarding the rules she should be required to follow while living at home. Essentially Canning is refusing to live at home with her parents who welcome her home but asking for her parents to pay for alternative living arrangements.

Canning is currently living with her best friend’s family. Further, Canning’s best friend’s father is funding her lawsuit against her parents by paying for her attorney fees. The New Jersey judge assigned to the case held that Canning did not have the legal right to request support from her parents and denied her motion. Generally, in California, the custodial parent petition’s the family court to request child support from the other parent. The recent New Jersey case is so controversial because an adult child is suing her parents for financial support in complete contrast to the traditional paradigm.In California child support cases, many parents ask if they have a legal obligation to support their child financially after the child reaches the age of 18. Pursuant to the California Family Code, unless there is an agreement by the parties or an incapacitated adult child meeting various requirements, a parent’s statutory duty to provide child support ends upon the child’s marriage, death, emancipation, at age 19, or at age 18 and is not attending high school full time – whichever occurs first. This means that in some cases, a parent is obligated to support a child after that child reaches the age of majority (18) as long as the child is still a full-time high school student. The reason for this particular provision is that some children start school later than others or are held back a grade. In those cases, the child will graduate high school at age 19 rather than age 18.

It is important to note that there are a variety of cases and statues which specifically deal with the support of an adult child who suffers from an incapacitating disability. These are fact driven cases and should be handled by a Certified Family Law Specialist.
Continue reading

Over the last few years many states have expanded the traditional idea of “family” by granting parental rights to parties under a variety of new circumstances. Now, non-married couples, same-sex couples, and even single parties can adopt children throughout the United States. Recently, a New York judge expanded the notion of family even further by holding that two friends (never involved in a romantic relationship) of different sexual orientation could adopt a child together. The new mother and father of an Ethiopian child do not even live together. Originally the mother wanted to have a child and the father offered to be a sperm donor. After the friends were unable to conceive, they decided to adopt a child together instead.The court’s decision to allow friends with no commitment to each other to adopt together has raised significant controversy. Among the opponents of the judge’s decision is Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council. He asserts the position that the judge’s ruling puts the parent’s needs over and above the needs of the child. This position is based on Sprigg’s belief that the purpose of adoption is “to provide homes for children that resemble as closely as possible the natural family” and that “we would do better to stick with the rule of nature that children do best with a mother and a father who are married to one another”. Sprigg cites the level of commitment between married parents as a source of stability for a child and contends that that lifelong pledge will bind the parents together in such a way that cannot be replicated by friends.

Considering the reality that divorce is not a myth and is in fact quite common in the United States today, Sprigg’s position merits little credibility. Marriage is a lifelong commitment; however, for a variety of reasons, marriages end. Further, divorce can be one of the most traumatizing experiences a child goes through. If the parents are never married, the child will not experience a divorce. The New York Judge reasoned that the parents “have created a nurturing family environment…including a well-thought-out, discussed and fluid method of sharing parental responsibilities between their homes.” Regardless of their marital status, the Judge believed these two to be competent parents.

With so many parentless children worldwide, it is questionable why any parental arrangement is detrimental to the best interests of the child as long as the proposed parents do not pose a danger to the child’s emotional and physical wellbeing.
Continue reading

Going through a divorce may be equally difficult for the children of the divorce as it is for the two spouses. Although they may show their grief in different ways, children are typically grieving right alongside their parents.

The news of an impending divorce usually causes children to initially experience feelings of shock. Although they may appear to be functioning okay on the surface, children are likely stunned at first and beginning to cope with their “loss” beneath the surface. As a result of their shock and numbness, a child’s ability to concentrate and think clearly may be impacted. As a parent, you can help your child cope by being patient, giving your child space to think through and process everything, and making yourself available to your child when he/she is ready to talk and have you listen.

A divorce may also cause children to experience feelings of searching or yearning. This typically results in the child “acting out” or possibly withdrawing from others. They may appear to be angry, restless or even bewildered. As a parent, you can help your child cope with these feelings by remaining calm, allowing your child to express his or her feelings and realizing that their feelings may change significantly each day.During a divorce children may also appear very disorganized or disoriented. This is a result of their extreme sadness or depression that they are experiencing as a result of the divorce. This may cause children to lose their appetite, have trouble sleeping, and even lack enthusiasm for the things that they used to enjoy. While a child is experiencing these feelings during a divorce, as a parent you can help by ensuring that your child gets the adequate sleep and nutrition that his or her body requires. It is also important to continually make yourself available and to provide opportunities to spend time together.

Lastly, children typically (and hopefully) go through a stage of acceptance in which they begin to accept the loss and perceive an opportunity for reorganization and resolution. During this stage, children appear to have more energy and seem less sad. As a parent, you can encourage your child to share his or her feelings. However, it is important to realize that your child may slip back into one of the previous stages of grief. Therefore, it is important to remain alert to your child’s mental state and behavior.

Although the parents may be overwhelmed with their inevitable emotions that come along with a divorce, it is important to take a step back and help your children cope with the divorce and corresponding stages of grief that they are experiencing alongside you.
Continue reading

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contact Information