Family Law Home
Blog
Contact Us

WHAT TO DO IF EX-SPOUSE IS NOT PAYING SPOUSAL SUPPORT (ALIMONY OR SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE)

August 26th, 2010

WHAT TO DO IF EX-SPOUSE IS NOT PAYING SPOUSAL SUPPORT (ALIMONY OR SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE)

 

Non payment of spousal maintenance is an issue often litigated in Arizona family law courts. 

 

Spousal maintenance payments more than five years overdue usually cannot be collected, unless that deadline has been extended by papers filed in court within 90 days before the deadline.  A judgment must be obtained prior to the expiration of the five years.  If you have a claim for spousal maintenance for which some of the payments were due several years ago, you may want to speak with an attorney right away before you lose your right to collect this money owed to you.

 

Failure to pay spousal maintenance can result in criminal charges (class 1 misdemeanor) when the person ordered to pay has notice of the order and willfully and without lawful excuse fails to comply with the terms of that order.  See A.R.S. § 25-511.01.

 

A competent family law attorney can assist in collection cases where spousal maintenance, child support, or other money is owed by a former spouse.

 

If you would like a free telephonic consultation regarding money owed to you, or money being collected from  you, or other family law issues, please contact McGuire Gardner at (800) 899-2730 or visit us at www.yourarizonadivorcelawyer.com .

Posted in family law | No Comments »

EAST VALLEY ARIZONA ATTORNEY DISCUSSES COST OF DIVORCE

August 26th, 2010

EAST VALLEY ARIZONA  ATTORNEY DISCUSSES COST OF DIVORCE

 Potential clients calling in on a free initial telephone consultation often want to know the cost of a divorce and who will pay for the divorce. 

 Arizona Court Filing Fees:  To file a dissolution of marriage (divorce) case in Arizona, the petitioner must pay the initial filing fee.  This varies from county to county within the state but is often around $300.00.  The Respondent would then pay a similar “Response Fee” in order to file a Response in the case.  Even in uncontested cases, the Respondent must pay the Response Fee, except when the case proceeds by default.

 The Court may order one party to pay for all, or a disproportionate share of all of the costs including filing fees and attorneys fees in certain cases.  The Court must look at the income and financial resources of both parties and the reasonableness of the positions taken in each case to make such a determination. 

 If you would like a free telephonic consultation regarding your family law case, please contact McGuire Gardner at (800) 899-2730 or visit us at www.yourarizonadivorcelawyer.com .

Posted in family law | No Comments »

TEMPE/EAST VALLEY ATTORNEY DISCUSSES ATTORNEYS FEES

July 16th, 2010

TEMPE/EAST VALLEY ATTORNEY DISCUSSES ATTORNEYS FEES

The Court in Family Law and Divorce cases has the ability to order one party to pay all or some portion of the other party’s attorneys’ fees and costs.  The Court will look at two issues in determining if such an order is appropriate.

First, the Court will look at the income and financial status of each party.  The Court has the discretion to order the party with greater financial assets and income to pay all or some portion of the other party’s attorneys fees.

Second, the Court will consider the reasonableness of the positions taken by each party.

While the Court may make and award of attorneys fees for either or both issues, the Court must consider both issues before making an award of attorneys fees.

For more information, or to contact an Arizona divorce lawyer, please check out our website at www.yourarizondivorcelawyer.com.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in family law | No Comments »

Can An Order Of Protection Include Animals?

June 17th, 2010

Can An Order Of Protection Include Animals?

Effective July 29, 2010, Senate Bill 1266 which was passed into law (Ch. 276)(2010), will allow a party obtaining an Order of Protection to obtain exclusive custody of a pet or animal and preclude the other party from coming near the animal.

Specifically, the new law states that the “judicial officer may also grant the plaintiff the exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal that is owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the plaintiff, the defendant, or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the plaintiff or the defendant, and order the defendant to stay away from the animal and forbid the defendant from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, committing an act of cruelty or neglect in violation of Section 13-2910, or otherwise disposing of the animal.”

To learn more or to schedule your free initial consultation by telephone please call us at (480) 829-9081 or visit us at www.yourarizonadivorcelawyer.com

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in family law | No Comments »

Spanking and Discipline During and After an Arizona Divorce

June 9th, 2010

Spanking and Discipline During and After an Arizona Divorce

While there is no law against spanking children as part of an overall discipline system, and many mental health professional agree that an occasional and properly used spanking may be an effective tool in raising children, parents going through a divorce or who have gone through a divorce should be very cautious about spanking their children.

During marriage, when both parents are working together as a team and support one another, spanking may be appropriate.  However, too often a spanking during a pending divorce or after a divorce may be blown out of proportion and designated by the other parent as child abuse or abusive behavior.  An unsporting parent can use a spanking to turn children away from the spanking parent as a form of parental alienation, or use the incident to commence a long and drawn out court battle.

Additionally, a spanked child that is in a loving home with two loving parents may receive a completely different message than would a child who is filled with self-doubts and confusion caused by the loss of his or her family and the structure that he or she was accustomed to prior to the divorce.  Children struggling with emotional setbacks may not respond the same to a spanking.

Furthermore, even if eventually proven to not have been abusive, the financial costs of defending oneself against a potential criminal child abuse case and a family law custody battle simply make it not worth the risk to spank a child or use any other form of physical punishment.

There are many books available, and counselors with whom one may speak with regarding alternate forms of discipline and punishment that may be more appropriate.

While it is important to maintain discipline during and after a divorce, one should be cautioned to consider the possible consequences before choosing to spank a child.


Please feel free to contact our firm for a free telephonic consultation.   www.mcguiregardner.com

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Is Facebook Causing Divorces?

May 7th, 2010

Is Facebook Causing Divorces?

An international article was recently published online (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Tech/Social-Media/Facebook-fuelling-divorce/articleshow/5885855.cms) discussing the causal effect of increased use of Facebook and other networking websites in divorces.  The article stated that as many as 20% of British Divorces made mention of Facebook as a part of the cause.

In Arizona, it will be much more difficult to assess the impact of social networks, as Arizona is a no-fault divorce state so specific allegations of infidelity are not required in court paperwork.

While the impact of Facebook on divorces comes in many forms, the most typical is the rekindling of long lost love or the locating of a first love from childhood days and the associated re-kindling of that romance.

Because of the reduced barriers when on-line, flirting that would never occur in person often does occur over the internet and people who may not have otherwise allowed themselves to become emotionally and romantically unfaithful to a current spouse may find that is exactly what has happened.

To contact an Arizona divorce lawyer, please check out our website at www.yourarizondivorcelawyer.com.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in family law | No Comments »

CAN I DISCHARGE DEBTS TO A FORMER SPOUSE IN BANKRUPTCY?

May 4th, 2010

CAN I DISCHARGE DEBTS TO A FORMER SPOUSE IN BANKRUPTCY?

Certain debts to a spouse or former spouse may be discharged in a bankruptcy.  However, the rules are quite complicated and you should carefully discuss the debts with a knowledgeable attorney.

Certain debts to a spouse or former spouse cannot be discharged in bankruptcy under the recent bankruptcy changes.  These include debts closely related to the support or maintenance of a spouse or children, including child support and spousal maintenance.

Other debts, usually debts to even out or equalize a property division in a divorce, may be dischargeable but only in a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy.

Occasionally these distinctions can be significantly blurred.  If payments to a former spouse are not clearly designated as either maintenance or equalization of property, the fight avoided in the divorce case may re-erupt in a non-dischargeability action in the subsequently filed bankruptcy case.

To speak with an attorney about your divorce or bankruptcy questions, please contact McGuire Gardner today.

For more information, or to contact an Arizona divorce lawyer, please check out our website at www.yourarizondivorcelawyer.com.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in family law | No Comments »

Division of Marital Property/Debts- Don’t Get a Cookie-Cutter Outcome

April 26th, 2010

Arizona law requires the “equitable” division of marital property and marital debts during a divorce. Generally this is intended to be an “equal” division, though there are some cases in which an equal division may not be a fair (or equitable) division.

Specifically, Arizona statute provides that the Court may consider “excessive or abnormal expenditures and the destruction, concealment, or fraudulent disposition of property.” A.R.S. § 25-318(C). Additionally, the Courts may properly consider “other factors that bear on the equities of a case.” Inboden.

For example, the Courts may consider the “length of the marriage; the contributions of each spouse to the community, financial or otherwise; the source of funds used to acquire the property to be divided; the allocation of debt; as well as any other factor that may affect the outcome.” Inboden.

Courts are trained to equally divide property in each case, as this is what occurs most frequently. Accordingly, if you believe that it would be fair that you receive a larger share of the marital property to make the division a fair division, you will need experienced legal counsel to present your case and convince the Court that your case is unusual and deserving of a different outcome than the cookie-cutter divorce that the Courts are accustomed to.

Please feel free to contact McGuire Gardner today to speak with an experienced family law attorney about your unique case.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

How One Judge Defines Legal Custody:

March 5th, 2010

Legal custody, usually either joint legal custody or sole legal custody, is the decision legal right/responsibility for decision making regarding the children.  It is not the amount of time each parent spends with the children.

 

The concept of what is included in legal decision making may vary from Judge to Judge, but generally encompasses major decisions in the areas of education, religion, and medical treatment of the children.

 

One Judge, a former family law attorney herself, recently put out a short list of the major decisions that would require both parent’s decision in a joint legal custody case.  The Judge first clarifies that day to day decisions are to be made by the parent with whom the child is staying at a given time (for example, what type of cereal to have for breakfast or what cartoon characters to have on band-aids).  These small day to day decisions do not require an agreement between both parents.  However, the following decisions should be discussed by the parents in a joint legal custody case before proceeding:

 

1.                  Enrollment or termination of enrollment in a particular school or school program.

2.                  Advancing or holding back in school.

3.                  Beginning or ending the regular practice of a religion.

4.                  Arranging for child care providers for long term and/or after school child care.

5.                  Selecting non-emergency medical, dental, orthodontic and/or psychological services.

6.                  Authorizing the child’s driver’s license.

7.                  Authorizing employment for the child.

8.                  Authorizing the child’s marriage.

9.                  Authorizing the child’s enlistment into the Armed Forces.

10.              Passport application for the child.

11.              Authorizing sex education for the child.

12.              Arranging or permitting regularly occurring extracurricular activities for the child.

13.              Authorizing the purchase of an automobile for the child.

14.              Authorizing or consenting to the minor donating blood.

 

The Judge clarified that this is not an exhaustive list, but rather a list to suggest the types of decisions that should be made jointly in joint custody cases.  When the parties cannot reach an agreement, they should either seek mediation or Court involvement to resolve the conflict.

 

For more information, or to contact an Arizona divorce lawyer, please check out our website at www.yourarizondivorcelawyer.com. 

Tags: , ,
Posted in family law | No Comments »

Child Support and Spousal Maintenance When One Party Voluntarily Reduces His or Her Income

February 12th, 2010

The Court can attribute to a party his or her earning potential when considering an award of spousal maintenance or child support.  There have been many cases in which one party will voluntarily quit his or her job and thereby reduce his or her income during the divorce process in an attempt to pay less child support and/or spousal maintenance.

 

In a prior  case, Little v. Little, the Appellate Court upheld the Trial Court’s right to attribute to the Husband his higher earning potential, even though he reduced his income by returning back to school.  The Court held that it was his choice to return to school and take a pay cut, but that this did not change the financial needs of his children. 

 

In a recent case, Pullen v. Pullen, issued December 24, 2009, the Appellate Court found that the logic in Little v. Little, carries forward into spousal maintenance cases also. 

 

This is not to say that the Court must or will always set child support and/or spousal maintenance based upon the highest potential income of an individual in all cases.  The Court must take into consideration the reasons for the reduced income, whether voluntary or involuntary, the impact upon the people entitled to support, the conduct of both parties, whether the reduced income was acquiesced to by both parties, and the timing of the reduction of income. 

 

If you believe that your spouse has improperly reduced his or her income to adversely affect child support and/or spousal maintenance in your case, or if you are being accused of improperly reducing your income and believe that you did so in good faith, please contact an attorney at McGuire Gardner P.L.L.C. for a free initial consultation by telephone to discuss your rights.  To learn more, go to www.yourarizonadivorcelawyer.com, or visit us at www.mcguiregardner.com. 

Tags: ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

« Older Entries