San Diego Divorce Attorneys Blog

October 14, 2015

What is a “Moore/Marsden” calculation and how does that effect the division of community property?

It happens all the time. One spouse buys a home before the date of marriage, but during the marriage, community money is used to pay down the mortgage. How does the Court typically deal with these situations?

This question was largely resolved in the Supreme Court of California case, In re Marriage of Moore, and the appellate case In re Marriage of Marsden, which to an extent clarified Moore.

These cases held that when the community pays down principal, the community is not only entitled to a dollar for dollar reimbursement, but is entitled to a pro tanto share of the appreciation in the property from the date of marriage to the time of trial. This leads us to the infamous Moore/Marsden formula.

October 13, 2015

“Manimony”

By Bickford Blado & Botros

Megan Fox may pay “manimony”…shows us alimony isn’t just for the ladies anymore!

After a 5 year marriage, Megan Fox filed for divorce from Brian Austin Green in August. While there has been much speculation since then as to whether Fox would be on the hook for spousal support, it seems that Green has just confirmed the possibility by his response filed September 29, 2015, on which he reportedly checked that magic little box requesting spousal support be paid to him by Fox.

October 12, 2015

Non-Confidential Custody Mediation

By Bickford Blado & Botros

The focus of this blog is parents involved in contested custody cases and required custody mediation. Contested custody cases come in all shapes and sizes. On one end of the spectrum you have the high-conflict custody cases (the knockdown, drag out fights) and on the other end you have the “we agree on most things, but there are some details that we still need to iron out.”

No matter where on the spectrum your case falls, if you and the other parent cannot reach a full agreement on custody issues, you will be required to attend child custody mediation. Under California law [Family Code §3170], any contested issue related to custody and visitation must be set for mediation.

October 8, 2015

How does the UCCJEA “more appropriate forum” exceptions affect which State will make custody and visitation orders over children?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

Earlier this week, we discussed the basics of how the UCCJEA determines which states get to make custody and visitation orders over children. We did not discuss the more appropriate forum exceptions of Family Code sections 3427 and 3428. These are discussed below.

As noted before, there are 4 types of jurisdiction under the UCCJEA: (1) Initial jurisdiction (2) Continuing, Exclusive Jurisdiction (3) Modification Jurisdiction and (4) Emergency Jurisdiction.

October 3, 2015

What Do You Do with Your Children’s Passports?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

There was a time before 2010 when you could go to Mexico for a few days and all that was required to return was a valid U.S. ID or a birth certificate. That changed in 2010 when the immigration regulations changed and a valid passport was required for all citizens, including children. There are certain exceptions which are not relevant to this blog, but that can be reviewed at U.S. Department of State.

Living in San Diego, travel to Mexico is a regular activity for many families. Whether it is to visit family still living in Mexico, for medical care, or just for pleasure travel, the draw of the beautiful beaches and fresh seafood is very strong.

October 1, 2015

Don’t be a Meanie, Be a Friend

By Bickford Blado & Botros

At this point almost all of America has seen the video of the adorable 6 year girl talking to her mother about divorce. (If you have not seen it yet, take a few minutes and watch it HERE.) With advice such as “Don’t be a Meanie, be a friend” and lines like, “What if there is just a little bit of persons and we eat them? Then no one will ever be here. Only the monsters in our place. We need everyone to be a person” the viewers can’t help but stop and take notice – plus this wisdom is coming from a little girl so sweet you want to eat her…but in a figurative way of course.

September 30, 2015

Back to School

By Bickford Blado & Botros

With school back in full swing for children all around San Diego County, I thought I would focus my blog on a very common occurrence in child custody matter; school enrollment.

When two parents decide to get a divorce, one or both of them will often move out of the family residence. With the cost of living so high in San Diego, that can mean moving out of the neighborhood the parties lived while they were together. If the parents end up living in close proximity, the issue of where their children will be enrolled for school is an easy one. What happens when the parents move to other parts of town or into different school districts? This can create a huge headache for parents and children resulting in hours spent commuting to school and work.

September 29, 2015

They Paid What?! How Is My California Child Support Obligation Calculated?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

At some point in your life, you have probably done a double-take upon hearing news of a crazy-sounding child support payment of a celebrity or famous athlete. The media loves to report on these sometimes exorbitant amounts, for the shock value given to amounts of money that many Americans may never even dream of seeing. Here are some reported examples:
• Halle Berry, paying $20,000 per month to ex-boyfriend for 1 daughter • Eddie Murphy, paying $51,000 per month for 1 daughter • Sean “Diddy” Combs, paying $20,000 per month to ex-girlfriend for 1 son and $21,782 per month for now adult son to another ex-girlfriend
• Charlie Sheen, paying $50,000 per month to ex-wife Denise Richards for 2 daughters, and $55,000 to a different ex-wife for 2 sons
• Allen Iverson, owing $8,000 per month to ex-wife • Terrell Owens, owing $120,000 per month in child support and mortgages to 4 different mothers (whether he actually pays is a completely different story…)

September 28, 2015

How does the UCCJEA determine which state gets to make custody and visitation orders over children?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

We live an increasingly mobile society, so it’s not unusual for families to find themselves in different parts of the country for a multitude of reasons. So, how is it decided which state gets to make custody and visitation orders over the children in these situations?

The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (“UCCJEA”) is a common body of rules adopted by every single state (except Massachusetts). A quick glance at the UCCJEA will quickly resolve the overwhelming majority of these questions. For the purposes of this blog post, the rarely used more appropriate forum exceptions will not be discussed.

There are 4 types of jurisdiction under the UCCJEA: (1) Initial jurisdiction (2) Continuing, Exclusive Jurisdiction (3) Modification Jurisdiction and (4) Emergency Jurisdiction.Initial jurisdiction is described in Family Code section 3421. California has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination if California “is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within 6 months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this state but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this state.” The “home state” is defined as the “state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than six months of age, the term means the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned” by Family Code section 3402.

So if the child was in California for the six months before the first child custody proceeding was commenced, California could assume jurisdiction.

Once California has jurisdiction over the child, under what circumstances does California cede jurisdiction to another state? Under Family Code section 3422, California has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to make orders over a child unless:

“(1) A court of this state determines that neither the child, nor the child and one parent, nor the child and a person acting as a parent have a significant connection with this state and that substantial evidence is no longer available in this state concerning the child’s care, protection, training, and personal relationships. (2) A court of this state or a court of another state determines that the child, the child’s parents, and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in this state. ..”

The language of this statute can be intimidating, but it can be boiled down to the following rules of thumb:

1. California will continue to have jurisdiction to make custody and visitation orders if at least one parent remains in California and that parent continues to exercise visitation rights with the child (even if the child lives in another state). This is pursuant to Kumar v. Superior Court.
2. If the neither of the parents nor the child live in California anymore, California no longer has jurisdiction to make orders.

When can California assume jurisdiction and modify a child custody order from another state? Pursuant to Family Code section 3423, California cannot modify another state’s order unless it would have jurisdiction under Family Codes section 3421 AND either of the following circumstances exist:

“(a) The court of the other state determines it no longer has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under Section 3422 …
(b) A court of this state or a court of the other state determines that the child, the child’s parents, and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in the other state.”

In other words, if the child has been in California for six months and neither the parents nor the children continue to reside in the state that originally made the last custody order, California can exercise jurisdiction over the child.

Finally, we get to Family Code section 3424, temporary emergency jurisdiction. Temporary emergency jurisdiction trumps all the other rules. California always has jurisdiction if the child is “present in the state and has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to, or threatened with, mistreatment or abuse.” This is so, even if California would not otherwise have jurisdiction under Family Code sections 3421, 3422, or 3423.
Continue reading

September 23, 2015

The Pope Has Arrived! A Discussion of Annulment in California and the Pope’s Reform to the Church’s Annulment Process

By Bickford Blado & Botros

All Americans, religious or not, are in an undeniable state of excitement upon Pope Francis’ first arrival on U.S. soil. As we are bombarded with media coverage of the visit at every turn, the divorce attorneys here at Bickford Blado & Botros find it a fitting time to discuss annulment in California and the Pope’s recent reform to the Catholic Church’s annulment process, announced by the Pope’s September 2015 Letters motu propio.

An annulment under California law and an annulment in the eyes of the Church are not synonymous. The Catholic Church does not give divorced people permission to remarry. So, if a Catholic person wishes to remarry, the Church must find that their first marriage was void before they are free to do so.In California, there are three legal options available to couples wishing to end or alter their marital status: dissolution (a.k.a. divorce), nullification, and legal separation. Divorce can only be granted where there has been a valid marriage. Nullification can only be granted if there was no valid marriage to begin with. Incest (see CA Family Code §2200), bigamy (see CA Family Code §2201), and lack of a lawful marriage contract (requires both issuance of a license and solemnization, see CA Family Code §300) would be grounds for a “void” marriage, one that will never be valid in the eyes of the law. Minority (under the age of 18 in CA), prior existing marriage, unsound mind, fraud, force, and physical incapacity are factors leading to marriages that are “voidable” (see CA Family Code §2211) meaning that they are valid in the eyes of the law until the parties seek and receive a judgment of nullification from a court.

For more information on grounds for annulment in California, see our April 1, 2015 blog titled, “Do I Qualify for an Annulment.”

For Catholics wishing to remarry, even after receiving a legal judgment of dissolution or nullification, they must still seek a decree of nullity from the Church. This process has faced a lot of criticism throughout the world for being a slow, expensive, and difficult process, and in some countries it is even considered basically impossible to do. So, Pope Francis’ new reform is meant to make the Catholic annulment process quicker and more accessible especially to the Church’s low-income members.

The most notable changes to the Church’s nullification process are as follows:
1. Now only one judgment of nullification is required. Automatic appeal to a second tribunal is removed, but appeal still remains an option in contested cases;
2. The Bishop is named as the principal judge in his diocese, who is able to designate this responsibility to a cleric if so desired;
3. Creation and addition of a third, quicker, process for cases where evidence of nullity is especially clear, to be decided by the Bishop himself. There are a number of situations where the new process can be used. Some examples include cases involving very brief marriage, existence of an extramarital affair at time of wedding or very soon thereafter, malicious concealment of things like infertility or a serious contagious disease, and more; and 4. Reintroduction of the ability to appeal the Bishop’s decision to the metropolitan bishop (or the Metropolitan Bishop’s decision to the Senior Suffragan Bishop).

Regardless of religious or cultural background, dissolution and annulment can be difficult for anyone. There are strict legal requirements and specific timing requirements associated with these requests. Our team of experienced attorneys can provide you the outstanding counsel you may need during these difficult times and will ensure that your needs are met as we help you navigate through the divorce or annulment process.
Continue reading