San Diego Divorce Attorneys Blog

April 12, 2011

Family Law Filing Fees in San Diego County

If you are heading to the court house to file a Petition for dissolution of marriage (or a Response), don’t forget to bring your check book. Here in San Diego County, the current filing fee for a “first paper” (which includes a Petition or a Response) is $395. And while that may seem quite expensive, it could be a lot worse.

The Associated Press recently reported on a new law in Romania which allows each of the country’s municipalities to set their own fee for a divorce. The towns’ fees range across the board, with the most expensive being Sangeorgiu de Mures. Couples divorcing in Sangeorgiu de Mures must pay 10,000 lei, which is approximately $3,370. To put this in perspective, The Associated Press reports that this amount is nearly 60 percent of the average annual salary. Interestingly, the fee to divorce in Sangeorgiu de Mures is 2,000 times what it costs in the capital city of Bucharest.

So why the high fee in Sangeorgiu de Mures? The Associated Press reports that the goal is to discourage divorce, as many of the town’s 8000 residents are catholic. And in fact, it appears to be working. According to The Associated Press, a number of couples have actually decided to remain married after learning of the high fee.

April 4, 2011

Divorce Litigation: Can My Spouse Pay For My Attorney?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

Did you happen to catch CNBC’s documentary Divorce Wars when it premiered last weekend? Promoted as “CNBC goes inside the confidential world of multi-million dollar divorce revealing the secrets of winning and losing on a battle field of emotional pain and financial gain”, the show highlighted, among other stories, the creation of Balance Point Funding, a company that provides money from private investors to fund divorce litigation in exchange for a percentage of the divorce settlement. According to its founder, Stacy Napp, the idea for the company was born from the challenges she faced in funding her own divorce litigation.

While creative, this is not the only option for a divorcing spouse in California. Rather, as a San Diego Divorce attorney, I regularly file motions for a contribution from the other spouse to my client’s attorney fees under Family Code Section 2030. This type of a motion is appropriate where there is a disparity between the parties in access to funds to retain counsel (in other words, “need”), and where one party is able to pay for legal representation of both parties (in other words, “ability”). The statute is designed to ensure that each party has access to legal representation, including access early in the proceedings, to preserve their respective rights.

While Family Code section 2030 addresses the allocation of attorney fees and cost, what about costs other than attorney fees and costs, such as court costs, expert fees and consultant fees? Family Code section 2032 provides a procedure by which either party may file a motion requesting that the court designate their case as complex or involving substantial issues of fact or law related to property rights, visitation, custody, or support. If the case is then designated as complex, the court has the discretion to allocate between the parties attorney fees and also court costs, expert fees, and consultant fees.

April 1, 2011

R&B Singer Rihanna’s Restraining Order Against Chris Brown Modified: An Overview of the DVPA

By Bickford Blado & Botros

This month’s edition of Rolling Stone magazine features a cover story on R&B singer Rihanna, in which she opens up about why she agreed to a modification of her restraining order against ex-boyfriend and fellow R&B singer, Chris Brown. The restraining order stems from an assault that occurred on the then couple’s way to the 2009 Grammy Awards.

Discussing her decision, Rihanna explained:

“It doesn’t mean we’re gonna make up, or even talk again. It just means I didn’t want to object to the judge.”

March 22, 2011

When Fault Matters in a No-Fault State

By Bickford Blado & Botros

California is considered a no-fault divorce state, meaning the reason a couple is divorcing is completely irrelevant to the court in whether the court will grant a divorce. Neither party has to prove the other was at fault for the break down of the marriage. There is even a statute that makes evidence of specific acts of misconduct is improper and inadmissible. It does not matter to the court whether you are requesting a divorce from your spouse because he/she is abusive toward you, uses drugs, is an alcoholic, cheats and/or has inappropriate Facebook relationships, works too much or that you have grown tired of your spouse. As long as one party alleges “irreconcilable differences”, meaning marital problems that cannot be resolved, the court will grant a request for divorce.

The other ground for divorce in California is “incurable insanity.” As a San Diego divorce attorney, although some of my clients think their spouse is “insane”, I never had a case where the “insanity” reached a level of “incurable insanity.”

So while fault has no impact on whether or not a court will grant a divorce, three areas of “fault” – domestic violence, drug use and alcoholism – can have a major impact on how the court decides the issues of custody, visitation and spousal support.

March 21, 2011

Termination of Marital Status Before All Issues in a Divorce are Resolved

By Bickford Blado & Botros

Jason London, star of the 1993 coming of age comedy Dazed and Confused, (not to be confused with his twin brother, Jeremy, the Party of Five and Seventh Heaven actor who was in the news last year for allegedly being kidnapping while changing a flat tire and forced to smoke crack at gunpoint,) finalized his divorce from wife, Charlie Spradling, last Thursday, according to E! Online.

E! Online reports that London and Spradling, after being separated for a number of years, filed for divorce in February 2010. In November 2010, before his divorce was finalized, London proposed to his girlfriend, Canadian born actress Sofia Karsten. Karsten said yes, and the couple plans to wed in July.

If London was planning on popping the question last November, why did he wait until now to finalize his divorce? Although I can only speculate, the logical answer is that there were issues raised in the divorce that simply weren’t resolved until now. But what if London had wanted to get married, and not just engaged, before all of the issues in his divorce were resolved? Could he have done so?

March 18, 2011

Facebook and Other Social Networking Sites as Sources of Evidence in Divorce Cases

By Bickford Blado & Botros

By now, most job seekers know that potential employers may take a look at Facebook, or other social networking sites, when evaluating a potential new hire. Job candidates are wise to this practice, and many take care to edit their social networking posts accordingly. But many divorcing spouses are not so smart, and sometimes with dire consequences.

USA Today reported on a survey of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers about the use of social networking sites as sources of evidence in divorce cases. The survey revealed that over the last 5 years, 81% of AAML members have used, or been faced with, evidence from Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter, among others. According to the survey, Facebook has been by far the most popular source with 66%, followed by MySpace with 15%, and Twitter with 5%.

To illustrate how social networking sites can be used as sources of evidence in family law cases, consider the following hypothetical cases. A parent is seeking an order for sole physical custody, claiming they are at home with the children every night, yet their Facebook page has photos of them out most nights “partying”. Or, a parent is alleging that the other parent has a drug problem and, sure enough, the offending parent has posted multiple photos of themselves on Facebook smoking marijuana. As a San Diego family law attorney, I have experience with similar cases.

March 16, 2011

Family Court: Circumstances Under Which a Court May Order a Drug Test

By Bickford Blado & Botros

TMZ.com reports that Charlie Sheen and Brooke Mueller have reached a custody agreement, which includes mutual drug testing. In the case of Sheen and Mueller, it appears the parties volunteered to submit to drug tests. But what if they didn’t volunteer to do so? Could the court order one, or both of them, to take a drug test?

Family Code section 3041.5, provides that “[i]n any custody or visitation proceeding…the court may order any person who is seeking custody of, or visitation with, a child who is the subject of the proceeding to undergo testing for the illegal use of controlled substances and the use of alcohol if there is a judicial determination based upon a preponderance of evidence that there is the habitual, frequent, or continual illegal use of controlled substances or the habitual or continual abuse of alcohol by the parent…”

Thus, the court may order a drug test, but only if it first determines, by a preponderance of evidence, that there is the habitual, frequent, or continual illegal use of controlled substances. Among the ways to show this is a conviction within the last five years for the illegal use or possession of a controlled substance. Family Code section 3041.5.

March 14, 2011

Will an Attempt at Reconciliation Change the Character of Property?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

If you are a fan of Who’s the Boss? star Tony Danza, you may recall that in 2006 he separated from his wife, Tracy. Four and a half years later, Tony Danza has filed for divorce according to People.com.

As a San Diego divorce lawyer, I have had clients in similar situations; specifically, clients who have waited some length of time after separating to file for divorce. Although I do not know the reason Tony Danza personally waited to file for divorce, sometimes parties wait to file for divorce because they are attempting reconciliation. In my work as a San Diego family law attorney, I have been asked how an attempt at reconciliation effects how property is divided, and specifically how an attempt at reconciliation effects how a spouse’s earnings will be characterized by a court, that is as separate property or community property.

Generally, except as otherwise provided by statue, all property, real or personal, wherever situated, acquired by a married person during the marriage while domiciled in this state is community property. Family Code section 760. One such statutory exception is that earnings and accumulations of a spouse while living separate and apart from the other spouse are separate property. Family Code section 771.

March 12, 2011

California: Grounds for Divorce in a No-Fault Divorce State

By Bickford Blado & Botros

As reported in The San Francisco Chronicle, retired San Francisco judge Isabella Horton Grant died of cancer on Saturday at age 87.

Judge Grant made many contributions to family law, including her participation in the drafting and passage of California’s no-fault divorce rule, which went into effect January 1, 1970 with the enactment of the Family Law Act of 1969.

Prior to the enactment of California’s no-fault divorce rule, the moving party in a divorce was a plaintiff who charged the other spouse, as a defendant, with being “at fault” for the divorce for reasons such as adultery, abuse, etc.

March 11, 2011

Are Recording Artist Ashlee Simpson and Fall Out Boy Band Member Pete Wentz Headed for a Custody Battle?

By Bickford Blado & Botros

Last month, recording artist Ashlee Simpson filed for divorce from Fall Out Boy band member Pete Wentz. The parties have a 2 year old son, Bronx.

According to People.com, in Simpson’s Petition for Dissolution of Marriage she requested sole custody of their son with visitation rights to Wentz. On Tuesday, Wentz filed his Response requesting joint custody of their son. While there is speculation that this may mean Simpson and Wentz are headed for a custody battle, my experience as a San Diego divorce attorney tells me that isn’t necessarily the case.

One of the first steps in the divorce process is to file the Petition or, depending on what side of the case you are on, the Response. When there are children involved, the Petition and Response are how the parties first tell the court what type of custody and visitation order they would like. The options include: legal custody to the Petitioner or Respondent or joint legal custody, physical custody to the Petitioner or Respondent or joint physical custody, and child visitation to the Petitioner or Respondent. Because the Petition and Response are forms, once a party determines which option is best, they simply check the appropriate box. (Of course, this is just what is being requested, and not necessarily what the court will ultimately order.)