Charlotte Divorce Lawyer Blog

North Carolina Legislature Moves To Impose Two-Year Waiting Period For Divorce :: Separation and Divorce Lawyers in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published on: April 4, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Attorney Matthew R. Arnold answering the question: “How long does getting a divorce take?”

Late last month, legislators in North Carolina took an unusual step to impose a two-year waiting period on divorce. The decision caused a stir not only in North Carolina, but across the country with articles laughably discussing the legislature’s move to meddle in marriages. Beyond imposing a two-year waiting period before a divorce can be granted, the bill, Senate Bill 518, would also require that couples who are considering divorce go through marriage counseling before the judge can officially sign off on the dissolution of the marriage.

The act, knowing as The Healthy Marriage Act, has been designed to strengthen the institution of marriage according to its Republican supporters in the state legislature. The measure would replace the current one-year separation that is in place before a couple can officially receive a divorce. The Act says that couples would be permitted to either live together or apart during the waiting period, with cohabitation not preventing the clock from ticking.

The legislation specifically states that before a divorce can take place, one spouse would have to submit a written notice to the other spouse notifying the other party about his or her intention to file for divorce. This would then begin the two-year countdown. During this interim period, the couple would be required to take classes about bettering their communication skills and improving their conflict resolution abilities. The Healthy Marriage Act does not require that the couple attend the classes together; each can take the courses on his or her own. If the couple has children there are even more hurdles that must be jumped through, including a four-hour course that discusses the impact of divorce on children.

Pregnant Man Appeals Judge’s Decision Not To Allow Divorce :: Separation and Divorce Lawyers in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published on: April 2, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Attorney Matthew R. Arnold answering the question: “Can any attorney help me with my family law needs in North Carolina?”

A lawyer for the transgender Arizona man who gave birth to three of his children after changing sex legally from female to male has been denied a divorce by a judge. Thomas Beatie had his divorce petition denied by the Arizona judge who said that the state laws do not recognize that his marriage ever occurred and thus do not allow him to grant a divorce. The judge said that the marriage is a same sex marriage, despite the currently different legal genders of the couple.

Beatie has announced that he intends to appeal the decision. David Cantor, Beatie’s divorce attorney, has said that he thinks the judge has discriminated against Beatie because of his unconventional lifestyle and allowed Beatie’s three pregnancies to impact his decision to grant a divorce. Cantor says an appeal will be filed shortly before the Arizona Supreme Court.

Beatie married his wife, Nancy, nine years ago in Hawaii. At the time of the marriage, Beatie had legally changed his sex from female to male and had a document proving this. The documents identified him as a male and revealed that he had taken some surgical steps to begin his transition into being a man.

What To Do About Spring Break In A North Carolina Divorce :: Separation and Divorce Lawyers in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published on: March 28, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Attorney Matthew R. Arnold answering the question: “Can any attorney help me with my family law needs in North Carolina?”

Everyone knows that spring break can be hectic, even for happily married families. Now throw in a divorce, hurt feelings, several children, parenting plans, two different houses and multiple schedules and you’ve got a recipe for disaster. In the best of cases planning for vacation and making sure everyone gets something that they want is tough. The way to ensure that things stay as civil as possible is to plan early and plan often.

The very first thing that divorcing couples can do to make spring break (and all similar vacations) easier, is to begin thinking about them during the divorce itself. Though you will likely have many other things on your mind, make sure that you and your attorney sit down to discuss the issue of vacations before the parenting plan is finalized. Work the language out now, including all the particulars, to avoid trouble later on. Though it can seem tedious to carefully lay out things like whether a vacation begins on a Friday after school lets out or whether it starts the following Monday morning, that level of specificity is essential to avoiding trouble down the road. It is important to remember that there are no right or wrong answers; any arrangement is fine so long as it works for you and your former spouse.

Billionaire Oil Man Prepares For World’s Most Expensive Divorce :: Separation and Divorce Lawyers in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published on: March 26, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Attorney Matthew R. Arnold answering the question: “How long does getting a divorce take?”

There is talk that a currently pending divorce involving Oklahoma oil mogul Harold Hamm and his second wife, Sue Ann Hamm, could be the largest divorce settlement in history. Just how much Sue Ann stands to walk away with depends on how much of Hamm’s oil company shares Sue Ann is able to lay claim to.

Hamm appeared on the recent Forbes list of the world’s wealthiest people with an estimated $11.3 billion net worth. The reason for Hamm’s wealth is his ownership in the oil company Continental Resources, a major player in the currently booming oil production out of North Dakota.

Hamm’s story is one common among entrepreneurs, beginning at the bottom and working his way to the top. Hamm started work at 20, scrubbing old oil barrels in Oklahoma. He grew in his job and learned new tasks, eventually scraping together enough money to start Continental in 1967, several decades before he married Sue Ann.

Hamm struck gold (black gold, that is) in the 1990s when he discovered the Bakken oil field of North Dakota, the largest oil field in the U.S. to have been discovered since the 1960s. The discovery sparked a surge in U.S. oil production, with Continental leading the way. The company has made millions by introducing the practice known as fracking, which helps extract oil from soil that was previously too hard to access. Today the Bakken makes up about 10% of total American oil output, with Continental holding on to a large slice of the pie.

Fear Of Chinese Property Bust Leads To Divorce Boom :: Separation and Divorce Lawyers in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published on: March 21, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Apparently in China the new thing to do is to get divorced. Filings in the country have exploded in recent weeks according to various reports. The reason is an odd one. It’s not the obvious answer, that mass numbers of Chinese people have simultaneously grown tired of their spouses. Instead, it has to do with real estate.

The Chinese government recently implemented a new tax on real estate sales, which contains an important loophole. The provision says that those people who are separated from their spouse can avoid paying the new tax.

The move to tax real estate sales is an attempt by the Chinese government to reign in their wild real estate market, which many international observers believe is headed for a bust. Property prices have skyrocketed across the country, but especially in the booming coastal cities of Beijing and Shanghai. To help avoid the painful bursting of a property bubble, the government is trying to use a tax to lower people’s enthusiasm for purchasing real estate.

The law applies a whopping 20 percent capital gains tax to the sale of any second homes. It didn’t take long for Chinese couples to figure out that if they divorced, they could each act as if they only had one home. By appearing to only own one house, the couple could sell the second property and avoid the 20 percent tax. After the sale of the house is finalized, all the couples have to do is get remarried.

According to the Shanghai Daily, one marriage registration center in the Zhabei District of Shanghai saw a record 53 divorces last week. The previous high was 40. In another district, 250 cases were filed as opposed to a typical 60 or 70. In the Changning District, divorce figures have reportedly jumped by 30 percent in only the last few weeks.

Different Ways To Value A House :: Equitable Distribution and Property Division Lawyers and Attorneys in Charlotte, NC

Published on: March 19, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Many tasks that might at first seem fairly straightforward can quickly become complicated in the midst of a tense divorce. One good example of something that should be relatively easy, but can be expensive in certain circumstances is deciding on a value for your marital residence.

The problem is that the value of the house, often the couple’s largest asset, matters a great deal when dividing the marital estate. Each side often has something to gain (or lose, as the case may be) based on the value of the house, which is why arriving at one number is often easier said than done. The issue has only become more complicated in recent years due to the economic downtown. People may find themselves in the unfortunate situation of being underwater on a house or believing it to be worth far more than it is. To help stop the bickering over price, research needs to be done to come up with a realistic value to facilitate a relatively painless division of assets.

There are three primary ways to determine the value of the house. First, and least expensive, is to do some simple online research of your own. Digging around on the Internet and looking at comparable listings with local realtors or MLS listings can often help you gauge the marketplace. The estimate will not be precise, far from it, but it can help determine a range that your house might fall into. This might end disputes where one spouse insists on a wildly inflated (or deflated) number. In some cases this might be enough research to put the issue to rest, but in the most acrimonious cases the value will likely be seen as too speculative to hold up in court.

The next approach is to have a comparative market analysis done. This means that an examination of sales prices of homes in your area is done. Realtors will usually do a CMA for little or no money and can help give you a fair market estimate for your house. Though this approach is much less expensive than a full-fledged appraisal, it’s also not as accurate. This is because CMAs do not take into account the specific condition of your house, something that can lead to large fluctuations in value.

New York Case Reveals How Far Legal System Has To Come To Reflect Modern Families :: Child Custody Lawyers and Attorneys in Charlotte, N.C.

Published on: February 28, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Though a quick scroll through the TV guide tells us how much American family life has changed over the decades, less “Brady Bunch” and more “Modern Family,” our family law system has failed to keep pace. The idea of what a family is supposed to look like has changed enormously as gay parenting and single mothers have become vastly more commonplace, yet the courts haven’t been as quick to adapt.

A clear instance of this gap is occurring today in New York State. A New York Times article recently discussed the complicated case of a pharmaceuticals executive named Jonathan Sporn. Dr. Sporn filed a motion in a New York court late last month saying that he and his then girlfriend, law firm partner Leann Leutner, had a baby boy last year. The couple had fertility issues and relied on an anonymous sperm donor. The two had been together for several years, living together in a committed, monogamous relationship. Two failed marriages had convinced them both not to get married again and they were instead going to raise their child as a non-married couple.

The problem with their plan arose in December when Leutner took the young boy and left Sporn for a new apartment in New Jersey. After a few days out of the city she killed herself. Though the turn of events was a surprise, it was not completely unexpected. Leutner had a history of psychological problems and was suffering from an especially serious case of postpartum depression.

Since Leutner’s death, the child has been in protective care and is now in a foster home in New York City, this despite repeated attempts by Sporn to get custody of his son. Leutner’s sister has also tried to get custody of the boy. So far a judge has agreed that either home would be acceptable for the child, yet despite this seal of approval Sporn still does not have his child who has been given the label “destitute” since, legally, he has no known parents.

Complicated Custody Case Raises Questions About Surrogacy :: Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Lawyers and Attorneys in Charlotte, North Carolina

Published on: February 26, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

CNN recently discussed a tragic case involving a fight between biological parents who discovered the child their surrogate was carrying would have a serious health defect and the woman carrying the child. The couple wanted the woman to have an abortion, something the surrogate fought, saying she felt protective over the baby. So protective in fact that she fled to another state that does not recognize surrogacy laws and found an adoptive mother to raise the handicapped child. The parents, who, it turns out, used an egg donor and thus are not both biologically related to the child, filed suit to claim legal rights to the child.

This convoluted tale is not a law school hypothetical, but the real case involving a woman named Crystal Kelley from Connecticut. The case began when a Connecticut couple who already had three children of their own decided they wanted a fourth but discovered the wife would not be able to carry the child. They then selected Kelley as their surrogate and, after using an egg donor, implanted the embryo. Not long after that they learned that the fetus their surrogate was carrying had developmental disabilities. Doctors said the child had a cleft lip and palate, a brain cyst and heart defects. The baby would need to have multiple heart surgeries after birth and was given only a 25% chance of leading a normal life.

The couple, worried about the child’s ultimate quality of life after having several premature children of their own, offered to pay the woman $10,000 to abort the baby. The woman, who initially claimed the procedure went against her religious beliefs, later admitted to demanding $15,000, but since says that was only in a moment of weakness. The couple refused the additional amount and launched a protracted campaign to enforce the surrogacy contract.

The original agreement the surrogate signed said specifically that she would agree to an abortion if the fetus had a severe abnormality. The woman said that she did not want to follow the agreement when confronted with the reality of what she would have to do. She then chose to leave Connecticut for Michigan where state laws disregard surrogacy contacts and where she would be deemed the child’s legal guardian.

Since then Kelley has given birth to a child with even worse medical problems then were expected. The child’s internal organs are in the wrong places, some don’t function properly, her ear is misshapen, she has an abnormally small head and has a brain that failed to completely divide into two hemispheres.

Bizarre Argument Becomes Focus Of Gay Marriage Case Before Supreme Court

Published on: February 21, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

In a recent amicus brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, the Obama administration attacked a legal argument that some see as key to the movement against gay marriage: that gay couples cannot accidentally become pregnant and thus do not require access to marriage. The argument is central to two major gay marriage cases before the nation’s highest court: Hollingsworth v. Perry about California’s gay marriage ban and U.S. v. Windsor which is challenging DOMA.

The attorney representing those supporting DOMA (the federal Defense of Marriage Act) wrote that opposite-sex couples have a unique tendency to produce unintended offspring. The attorney, Paul Clement, went on to say that because same-sex couples cannot naturally produce children, the government has a legitimate interest in solely recognizing those marriages between men and women because this can encourage them to form stable family units to raise children. Those opposed to gay marriage also argue that by allowing gay couples to marry it may discourage other straight couples from marrying, thus harming a legitimate government interest in encourage procreation.

The Obama administration said it was ridiculous to pretend that marriage is merely society’s way of dealing with unintended pregnancies. The brief also said that gay marriage would neither help nor hurt straight couples who might want to marry.

Native American Adoption Case Goes Before Supreme Court :: Adoption Lawyers and Attorneys in Charlotte, NC

Published on: February 19, 2013 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

The Supreme Court announced its upcoming schedule and revealed that it will hear oral arguments in an important case known as Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl. The case, more commonly known as the Baby Veronica case, involves a 2011 South Carolina Supreme Court decision about the parental rights of a 2-year-old girl of mixed race, half white and half Native American.

The case began in 2008 when Christina Maldonado, a white woman, got engaged to Dusten Brown, a member of the Cherokee Nation. A month later Maldonado became pregnant and Brown pushed her to move up their wedding date. Maldonado, feeling uncomfortable with the pressure broke off their engagement and eventually decided to put the child up for adoption.

In 2009, Maldonado met a couple interested in adopting the child though Brown was never involved in the adoption process. Oklahoma law requires that all Indian tribes be notified of any adoptions that involve children of Indian heritage.

In January of 2010 Brown, who was about to deploy to Iraq, heard about the adoption. He got ahold of legal papers which indicated he was not contesting the relinquishment of his parental rights and had waived the standard waiting period for the adoption. With the help of a military attorney he was able to request a stay of the adoption proceedings.

More than a year later a family court in Charleston, SC ruled in favor of Brown holding that state law was trumped by the federal Indian Child Welfare Act which protects the rights of Indian parents involved in adoption proceedings. South Carolina law would have worked against Brown as it says that a father’s parental rights are terminated if he fails to provide pre-birth support and does not become involved in the child’s life shortly after birth.