Research also shows that, due to the voluntary nature of mediation, when compromise is reached between opposing parties after negotiating in good faith, having fully disclosed all relevant information and are the parties are empowered because they are fully informed, the agreement made is more durable that a court imposed resolution.  This means that parties are less apt to try and go back on their agreement to change it when resolution is reached in a good mediation.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this to convert to a helpful dialogue and resource.

The person that is made a crazy by these “crazy making behaviors” is the other party because the other party doesn’t know how to handle the other party’s crazy behavior: ignore it, respond to it?  So how do you avoid being made crazy by an opposing parties irrational behavior?

The most common question my “sane” clients ask themselves that causes them to spiral into insanity is, “Why?”   My clients ask themselves the following kinds of questions: 

• “Why is he/she doing that?” 
• “What is he/she thinking?” 
• “Why doesn’t he/she do . . . [some logical act] ?” 

If you find yourself asking these questions over and over again during your family law case, either stop asking or go to your own mental health treatment provider and ask them the questions so that your counselor can help you decide whether there is an answer to your questions or if you just need to drop it, assess the facts and proceed with your case regardless of the opposing parties irrational and illogical actions.

After a certain point, asking yourself why somebody does something or trying to figure out what they are thinking when they are engaging in crazy behavior will only drive you crazy.  The trick is to identify when it is still safe and healthy for you to be asking, answering and acting upon your answers to these questions (to defend or prosecute your case) or when there really are no answers to your “Why?” questions and move on with your own plan decisively.

In short, don’t get sucked into overanalyzing the opposing parties crazy making behavior and letting their behavior negatively impact and influence you.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this blog to become a helpful dialogue and resource.

A parent will be hauled into court for failure to pay child support.  The parent will say that they have lost their job, or their income has been reduced for some reason or another, and they just can’t pay child support.  The commissioner’s response, ” I don’t understand zero.”

This statement doesn’t come when a parent has been making some kind of payments, even if it is not the full amount that is owed.  At least the parent seems to be trying.  But what the commissioner cannot understand is how a parent can eat themselves and not provide for their child or children to eat – “I don’t understand zero.”

Lesson learned: if you are struggling to pay your child support obligation for any reason, and you don’t want to go to jail for contempt, pay whatever you can.  Keep a close accounting of your income and outflow of money so that you can show what you are spending your money on that is not fully paying your child support.  But, do NOT fail to pay some child support, as you will get no sympathy or understanding from the judge/commissioner if you don’t pay any child support at all.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this blog to become a helpful dialogue and resource.

UVU’S LEGAL STUDIES PROGRAM TO SPONSOR FREE LEGAL CLINIC

Through a joint effort between Utah Valley University’s Legal Studies Program and the local legal community, those in need of legal services will be able to receive free legal advice at a clinic scheduled for Oct. 25 in the UVU Library.

“This is an important service for the low income or middle income in the community who cannot afford an attorney,” said Jill Jasperson, associate director of UVU’s Center for the Study of Ethics. “It is designed to help them with their legal issues and problems.”

The legal consultation clinic, set from 6-8:30 p.m. in the Timpanogos Room on the fourth floor of the UVU Library, is in conjunction with National Pro Bono Week. Attorneys with varying expertise – including family law, employment law, civil rights, commercial law, contracts law, disability law, landlord-tenant law, criminal law, personal injury law, bankruptcy, commercial law, immigration law and estate planning – will be available to provide legal advice and guidance on most every legal issue.

“All UVU faculty, staff and students are invited, along with anyone in the Utah County area who might have a legal issue and a need for legal guidance,” Jasperson said. “All of the legal services will be donated from the local legal community.”

Participants need to bring all documentation necessary to explain and assist in their cases. The brief consultations, with an attorney and paralegal student present, will take place in a private room. A notary public will also be available. Services are rendered on a first-come, first-serve basis. Depending on demand, there might be a short waiting period. Parking is available in the lot L-7, north of the Library.

“At the past two clinics, we’re estimating that more than $30,000 worth of legal services were rendered by the local legal community,” Jasperson said.

The clinic is also sponsored by the Woodbury School of Business, the UVU Center for the Study of Ethics, Utah Community Credit Union and the Central Utah Bar Association.
For more information contact the UVU Legal Studies Office at 801-863-8134, or Mike Rigert, UVU communications manager at 801-863-6807.

About UVU
Utah Valley University is located in Orem, Utah, and is home to nearly 33,000 students. UVU began as a vocational school during World War II, and in the seven decades since has evolved into a technical school, community college, state college and, finally, a comprehensive regional teaching university. UVU is one of Utah’s largest institutions of higher learning and offers programs ranging from career training to high-demand master degrees, with emphasis on undergraduate education.

The opposing party-parent claimed that my client-parent, allegedly based on information provided by my client, was going to have the young children walking to school on very large and dangerous roads to and from school and that the parties’ young children would be left alone at home before and after school because of my client’s work schedule, leaving home and arriving home without any adult present in the children’s primary residence.  The opposing party-parent’s allegations were completely unfounded, based on assumptions on hearsay, without any personal knowledge of any kind of evidence, admissible or otherwise, to present to the court.

The fact was that my client-parent had not informed the opposing party parent of my client-parent’s enrollment of the parties’ children in their new school, how the parties’ children would or would not be transported to school, or what my client-parent’s work schedule was going to be or how my client-parent’s work schedule would line-up with the parties’ children’s school schedule.  My client-parent had already arranged a work schedule allow daily accompanying of the parties’ children to school from their home and from school to their home, providing full-time personal, parental care for the parties’ children before and after school.  The opposing party-parent’s claims regarding my client-parent’s alleged intended plans for the parties’ children based on the opposing party-parent’s conversation(s) with my client-parent were simply untrue, as there had been no such alleged conversations.

While there was no merit to the opposing party-parent’s claim and the relief sought by the opposing party-parent was denied, the court did not award my client-parent attorney fees.  What?

The judge began his ruling by stating, “This is an expensive way to have a conversation.”  In the end, the judge’s ruling to not award my client-parent attorney fees even though the opposing party’s claim was meritless and the TRO was denied was based on the court’s finding that my client-parent (by my client-parent’s admission) had not informed the opposing party-parent of: my client-parent’s registration of the parties’ young children in the “new” local school; how the parties’ children were going to be transported to school; that my client-parent would be providing personal, parental care at all times for the parties’ young children daily before and after school, or; what my client-parent’s daily work schedule was going to be to accommodate my client-parent’s ability to provide that personal, parental care for the parties’ young children.

So what is the lesson learned?
In a divorce/post-divorce situation where there is a minor child(ren) of the two divorcing/divorced parties, as a divorcing/divorced co-parent, you must (absent other intervening factors or orders) learn to communicate with your co-parent, your child(ren)’s other parent.  It is always best if parent-parties can get along and communicate civilly via telephone, e-mail, or text.  However, if you feel your co-parent is difficult or uncivil, you MUST communicate in writing (keep a copy for yourself of everything you send).  I prefer my clients communicate with their co-parent via e-mail, my next choice is traditional U.S. Mail, and I hate cell phone texts (these are really hard to capture and introduce as evidence to the court).

The key here is that you MUST communicate.  After the experience I have shared above, I recommended that my client-parent that my client-parent communicate in writing to the opposing party/co-parent regarding the parties’ children at least every 1-2 weeks, giving updates on activities, events, etc.  Putting all communications in writing (and keeping a copy) creates a record of communication that documents your good faith efforts to share information with your co-parent.  All other things being equal, had my client-parent communicated in writing to the opposing party/co-parent, my client-parent would have been awarded attorney fees or, even better, we wouldn’t even have been in court in the first place.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this blog to become a helpful dialogue and resource.

Examples of waste of the marital estate include, but are not limited to money spent on extramarital relationships or gambling.  Marital assets expended on habits or hobbies by one spouse that may be distasteful to the other spouse does not necessarily constitute waste of the marital estate.

The big exception to the rule with regards to waste of the marital estate is when the other spouse has held silent and not done anything to stop the spouse wasting the maritial estate.  For example, if one spouse is always buying lots of clothes, tools, toys, etc., and the other spouse simply disapproves but does nothing legal to stop it, then it is very likely that a court will not find waste of the marital estate, just poor judgment on the part of the waster and lack of will in the other spouse.

Another difficulty with receiving relief when there has been waste of the marital estate is that, though a court may find there has been waste, oft times the waster has put him or herself into such an untenable financial position that there will never be a way for injured spouse to recover the waste.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this to convert to a helpful dialogue and resource.

The way to keep extra-marital property from becoming part of the marital estate is to ensure that it is not commingled with the marital estate and maintained without assets or funds of the marital estate.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this to convert to a helpful dialogue and resource.

When married couples combine their finances, the property and/or debt becomes marital and not separate.  A party should not believe that commingling assets and debt was foolish now that they are getting divorced, if the intent of combining assets at marriage was to be sure the spouses are truly partners in the marriage venture.  Research has suggested that spouses should not keep their money separate, but manage their finances together.

However, once parties have commingled their finances, those commingled assets or debts become marital.  Commingling of separate property and debts does not only happen by combinging accounts.  For example, if parties get married where one party owns a home, but the name of the home is then changed into the name of both parties (a gift by one spouse to the other), or marital assets (income of either or both of the spouses) are used to pay the mortgage on the home and/or maintain the home, then the home becomes, at least in part, a marital asset.

Finances that have not been commingled can be considered as separate property.  The same goes for debts.

Please comment, add, refute, clarify or inquire regarding this posting if you are so inclined.  I would love for this to convert to a helpful dialogue and resource.