As if we didn’t hear enough about celebrity family issues this week. Kelsey Grammer has filed legal papers in court seeking sole physical custody of his two children: 9 year old daughter Mason, and 6 year old son Jade. The kids actually live in L.A. with their mother, Camille Grammer, while Kelsey lives in Chicago with his new wife, Kayte Walsh. In the divorce, Camille Grammer was granted physical custody of the children, but Kelsey Grammer apparently wants to change that and move them to Chicago: Kelsey Grammer Trying to Rip Custody from Camille.
What does it take to win a custody battle, and move two children from their home in LA to Chicago? In Michigan, this is no small feat. First, the Court must determine that there has actually been a change in circumstances or that there is good cause in order to change a custody arrangement. If the Court determines that there has been a change in circumstances or good cause, then the Court must determine that the proposed custody arrangement is in the best interests of the children. This means that the Court must listen testimony and review evidence surrounding 12 best interest factors, listed in MCL 722.23. In the case where the proposed custody change would essentially transfer the children physically from one parent to the other, the Court must find that the proposed change is in the best interests of the children by “clear and convincing evidence.”
Additionally, in Michigan, if you not only want to change custody, but then want to move the children out of state, the Court must consider other issues. In what is called the D’Onofrio test, the Court must find that the relocation is in the best interest of the children by a preponderance of the evidence after consideration of the following factors:
1. Will the change improve the quality of life for the child and parent
2. The degree to which each parent has complied with their parenting time schedule
3. The degree to which the court can modify parenting time to preserve & foster the relationship
4. The extent to which the opposing parent is motivated by financial reasons
5. Domestic violence, regardless of whether it involves the child
Obviously, a cross-country custody battle is not as easy as just filing legal papers asserting what you want. The process is extremely involved and requires substantial evidence that the proposed custody change will be best for the children. This case provides good reminder that the Courts are there to determine what’s best for the kids—not just what the parents want.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Wendy Alton: Experienced and compassionate attorney empowering clients to creatively resolve family conflict.
Ann Arbor, Michigan | 734-673-3567 | wendy@wendyaltonlaw.com |https://wendyaltonlaw.com
Friday, May 20, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Teenage “Love Child:” Why is Paternity Public Now?
There is no question that the hottest news (gossip) topic in the last few days has been centered around the “love child” fathered by Arnold Schwarzenegger with his housekeeper, allegedly Mildred “Patty” Patricia Baena, while he was married to Maria Shriver. The news has been shocking, devastating, and sad, to say the least. Even more shocking that the child is now a teenager, and this entire relationship and child was hidden privately and publicly for over a decade.
Which raises an interesting question. Why has this become public now, since the child is assumed to be about 14 years old? Why not earlier? While I don’t presume to know the laws of paternity in California, a brief overview of paternity law in Michigan may provide some possible answers.
In Michigan, if a child is born while a woman is married, that child is legally presumed to be the biological child of the married parents. No one can challenge this paternity while the couple is married, even if a DNA test proves that the biological father is someone else.
If a woman becomes pregnant when she is unmarried, but then marries someone before the child is born, the child is presumed to be the father of the man she marries. This is true again even if DNA tests prove that the biological father is someone else.
In short, Michigan honors the sanctity of marriage for purposes of paternity. If a child is born during a marriage, the husband is presumed legally to be the father.
However, if the couple files for divorce, the mother or father can challenge the paternity of any of the children born during the marriage. If this happens, a DNA test is conducted, and if the test proves that the husband is not the father, the divorce judgment can include this information, and that child’s paternity remains an open question. If this happens, once the divorce becomes final, the mother or the assumed true biological father can the file a paternity action to establish paternity of that child.
Simply, if a man knows that he has fathered a child, even if a DNA test is done, he has no standing under Michigan law to establish his paternity if the mother is married to someone else. Additionally, if the mother does divorce, but the divorce judgment indicates that all the children born during the marriage are children of the husband and wife, the biological father still lacks standing. The husband is presumed to be the father (despite DNA), and this issue cannot be challenged once the divorce is finalized.
Turning back to the case of Arnold Schwartzenegger and his housekeeper, it was noted by the press that Patty Baena was married at the time she conceived this “love child.” If that is the case, then Patty Baena’s husband was legally presumed to be the father. However, the press has also stated that she is now divorced. Perhaps the divorce judgment indicates that this “love child” is not a child of that marriage, leaving paternity open. Perhaps Patty Baena is now going to file either a paternity or child support action, seeking financial support for her child. It’s just a guess, but if you analyze the law surrounding paternity issues, it makes sense.
Read the LA Times story that broke the news here: Maria Shriver on Schwarzenegger's paternity admission: 'Painful and heartbreaking.'
Read the Radar Online story that broke the news about the housekeeper’s identity: WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Mother Of Arnold Schwarzenegger's Love Child Revealed!
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
.
Which raises an interesting question. Why has this become public now, since the child is assumed to be about 14 years old? Why not earlier? While I don’t presume to know the laws of paternity in California, a brief overview of paternity law in Michigan may provide some possible answers.
In Michigan, if a child is born while a woman is married, that child is legally presumed to be the biological child of the married parents. No one can challenge this paternity while the couple is married, even if a DNA test proves that the biological father is someone else.
If a woman becomes pregnant when she is unmarried, but then marries someone before the child is born, the child is presumed to be the father of the man she marries. This is true again even if DNA tests prove that the biological father is someone else.
In short, Michigan honors the sanctity of marriage for purposes of paternity. If a child is born during a marriage, the husband is presumed legally to be the father.
However, if the couple files for divorce, the mother or father can challenge the paternity of any of the children born during the marriage. If this happens, a DNA test is conducted, and if the test proves that the husband is not the father, the divorce judgment can include this information, and that child’s paternity remains an open question. If this happens, once the divorce becomes final, the mother or the assumed true biological father can the file a paternity action to establish paternity of that child.
Simply, if a man knows that he has fathered a child, even if a DNA test is done, he has no standing under Michigan law to establish his paternity if the mother is married to someone else. Additionally, if the mother does divorce, but the divorce judgment indicates that all the children born during the marriage are children of the husband and wife, the biological father still lacks standing. The husband is presumed to be the father (despite DNA), and this issue cannot be challenged once the divorce is finalized.
Turning back to the case of Arnold Schwartzenegger and his housekeeper, it was noted by the press that Patty Baena was married at the time she conceived this “love child.” If that is the case, then Patty Baena’s husband was legally presumed to be the father. However, the press has also stated that she is now divorced. Perhaps the divorce judgment indicates that this “love child” is not a child of that marriage, leaving paternity open. Perhaps Patty Baena is now going to file either a paternity or child support action, seeking financial support for her child. It’s just a guess, but if you analyze the law surrounding paternity issues, it makes sense.
Read the LA Times story that broke the news here: Maria Shriver on Schwarzenegger's paternity admission: 'Painful and heartbreaking.'
Read the Radar Online story that broke the news about the housekeeper’s identity: WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Mother Of Arnold Schwarzenegger's Love Child Revealed!
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Take "All my Loving" (and my Money too)
Paul McCartney is marrying for the third time—this time to Nancy Shevell. Apparently they have known each other for 20 years, and she has independent wealth of her own. Perhaps this is the reason they have announced they are not going to sign any prenuptial agreements. The media has reported that Nancy has signed a one-page document stating that she won’t pursue any of the trust fund money going to Paul’s children. Other than that, no prenuptial agreement. Good or bad?
Prenuptial agreements are agreements made between couples who are planning on getting married. Those agreements will state what happens with their money and property if they ever divorce or die. It can dictate how they will purchase things and how they will share debt. It can indicate whether or not spousal support or alimony will be awarded if they divorce.
Prenuptial agreements are very common when two people are bringing significant assets of their own into the marriage, or even significant debt. They are also common when people are marrying later in life and they have grown children they want to provide for if they were to pass away. They are common with people who are marrying for the 2nd or 3rd time, or for people who have businesses that they have started or have inherited through the family. They are far more common than they used to be.
For couples that are anticipating marriage, it is very important to at least consider whether or not to have a prenuptial agreement in place prior to getting married. This is particularly important if each person has their own property, investments, retirement and savings. If a couple decides on a prenuptial agreement, they must fully disclose to each other all of their property and debt and the value of each, and must agree to consult with an attorney prior to signing it. They are usually signed prior to the wedding.
And yes, they are drafted for people just like you and me, even if we don’t have royalties from Beatles’ songs at stake.
Read the ABC news story here: Paul McCartney Engaged to Nancy Shevell: Third Time Charmed?
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Prenuptial agreements are agreements made between couples who are planning on getting married. Those agreements will state what happens with their money and property if they ever divorce or die. It can dictate how they will purchase things and how they will share debt. It can indicate whether or not spousal support or alimony will be awarded if they divorce.
Prenuptial agreements are very common when two people are bringing significant assets of their own into the marriage, or even significant debt. They are also common when people are marrying later in life and they have grown children they want to provide for if they were to pass away. They are common with people who are marrying for the 2nd or 3rd time, or for people who have businesses that they have started or have inherited through the family. They are far more common than they used to be.
For couples that are anticipating marriage, it is very important to at least consider whether or not to have a prenuptial agreement in place prior to getting married. This is particularly important if each person has their own property, investments, retirement and savings. If a couple decides on a prenuptial agreement, they must fully disclose to each other all of their property and debt and the value of each, and must agree to consult with an attorney prior to signing it. They are usually signed prior to the wedding.
And yes, they are drafted for people just like you and me, even if we don’t have royalties from Beatles’ songs at stake.
Read the ABC news story here: Paul McCartney Engaged to Nancy Shevell: Third Time Charmed?
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Friday, May 13, 2011
The iPhone Divorce App: Will it Make Divorce Lawyers Extinct?
There is no doubt that the iPhone offers significant advantages to cell phone users with the hundreds, if not thousands, of apps (applications) that you can download and use. You can use your iPhone to read on the (free) Kindle, rent movies, check local gas prices, plan your workouts and download coupons, just to name a few. You can truly personalize your phone to your own life. Now, it appears you can also download apps to help you through your divorce.
A Dallas Texas family law attorney created 2 divorce apps for the iPhone: one that focuses on the cost and preparation for a divorce, and the other for splitting assets. You can review these apps here: DivorceApps.com.
You can also download another divorce app called the “Divorce Encyclopedia,” which can be found here: 3stepdivorce.com.
Without looking at the apps themselves it is difficult to tell how effective or educational they may be. I typically advise my clients to read anything online with skepticism, because only a Michigan family law attorney truly understands how the court will handle your divorce issues. That being said, there are valuable websites that offer a wealth of credible information. Perhaps apps will do that as well.
So, are the apps worth it? I don’t know—I have a Droid phone. I guess I’ll have to buy an iPhone to know for sure!
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
A Dallas Texas family law attorney created 2 divorce apps for the iPhone: one that focuses on the cost and preparation for a divorce, and the other for splitting assets. You can review these apps here: DivorceApps.com.
You can also download another divorce app called the “Divorce Encyclopedia,” which can be found here: 3stepdivorce.com.
Without looking at the apps themselves it is difficult to tell how effective or educational they may be. I typically advise my clients to read anything online with skepticism, because only a Michigan family law attorney truly understands how the court will handle your divorce issues. That being said, there are valuable websites that offer a wealth of credible information. Perhaps apps will do that as well.
So, are the apps worth it? I don’t know—I have a Droid phone. I guess I’ll have to buy an iPhone to know for sure!
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Parenting Time: Are Courts Biased?
Parenting time is the legal term used in divorce for the specific schedule that each parent has with their children. Two recent studies conducted by Arizona State University raise some questions about whether the family courts are biased in their awards of parenting time.
I blogged last week about the parenting time schedule that the Wayne County Circuit (Family) Court recently implemented. Effective this year, parents that have a judgment or order that specifies “reasonable parenting time” will be bound by the court’s schedule, found here: Wayne County Circuit Court Co-Parenting Plan. Interestingly, the Co-Parenting Plan establishes parenting time plans time based upon the child’s age. Even a brief review of the Co-Parenting Plan reveals that in no way does it provide for equal time for both parents. The Co-Parenting Plan provides the non-custodial parent (usually dad) overnights on an every-other weekend basis, with one overnight each week.
However, the studies conducted and summarized here, Public Support Rising for Joint Custody, reveal that there is an incredible growing public support for equal time for both parents. Equal time was preferred in these studies even in high-conflict situations. The participants of the study made mock decisions as a judge in custody disputes, and overwhelmingly granted equal time to the mother and father. The studies reveal that the public believes that courts favor mom, and that the courts should instead be giving equal time with the children to both mom and dad.
The law in Michigan regarding parenting time states that “It is presumed to be in the best interests of a child for the child to have a strong relationship with both of his or her parents… parenting time shall be granted to a parent in a frequency, duration, and type reasonably calculated to promote a strong relationship.” MCL 722.27a. Many believe that this goes hand-in-hand with giving mom and dad equal time with the children. Many believe that the enforcement of cookie-cutter parenting time guidelines or even the Wayne County Co-Parenting Plan does not promote a strong relationship between the parents and their children.
It will be interesting to see how the courts respond to the growing public demand for equal parenting time, especially in light of recent parenting time guidelines that generally favor mom.
Lesson to learn? If you are going through a divorce and you are unsatisfied with the court’s parenting time plan, make sure that you or your attorney negotiate the specific time that you want time with your children. Agree on a schedule that works for the best of your own family.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
I blogged last week about the parenting time schedule that the Wayne County Circuit (Family) Court recently implemented. Effective this year, parents that have a judgment or order that specifies “reasonable parenting time” will be bound by the court’s schedule, found here: Wayne County Circuit Court Co-Parenting Plan. Interestingly, the Co-Parenting Plan establishes parenting time plans time based upon the child’s age. Even a brief review of the Co-Parenting Plan reveals that in no way does it provide for equal time for both parents. The Co-Parenting Plan provides the non-custodial parent (usually dad) overnights on an every-other weekend basis, with one overnight each week.
However, the studies conducted and summarized here, Public Support Rising for Joint Custody, reveal that there is an incredible growing public support for equal time for both parents. Equal time was preferred in these studies even in high-conflict situations. The participants of the study made mock decisions as a judge in custody disputes, and overwhelmingly granted equal time to the mother and father. The studies reveal that the public believes that courts favor mom, and that the courts should instead be giving equal time with the children to both mom and dad.
The law in Michigan regarding parenting time states that “It is presumed to be in the best interests of a child for the child to have a strong relationship with both of his or her parents… parenting time shall be granted to a parent in a frequency, duration, and type reasonably calculated to promote a strong relationship.” MCL 722.27a. Many believe that this goes hand-in-hand with giving mom and dad equal time with the children. Many believe that the enforcement of cookie-cutter parenting time guidelines or even the Wayne County Co-Parenting Plan does not promote a strong relationship between the parents and their children.
It will be interesting to see how the courts respond to the growing public demand for equal parenting time, especially in light of recent parenting time guidelines that generally favor mom.
Lesson to learn? If you are going through a divorce and you are unsatisfied with the court’s parenting time plan, make sure that you or your attorney negotiate the specific time that you want time with your children. Agree on a schedule that works for the best of your own family.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Detroit Divorce TV
The Michigan Film Office has just approved film incentives for a pilot courtroom reality TV show: “Domestic Justice.” The TV show is described as an “explosive new judicial reality show” where “real life drama meets common sense justice.” The episodes will involve domestic disputes involving custody and parenting time, but also bullying and harassment. The justice will be administered by Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Vonda Evans.
So is this going to be another Judge Judy show? A close look at the TV show’s website may provide an answer to this: Domestic Justice. It appears that the unique twist of Domestic Justice is that it will employ short-term and long-term counseling and therapy supervision for the participants, and appears that the focus of the “justice” will be on finding resolutions that integrate on-going counseling for everyone involved. The goal is also to provide follow-up segments to track the progress of the people involved in the dispute.
Do you have an issue that you want to submit for “common sense justice?” If so, the website Domestic Justice provides you with a list of questions to answer, and if your issue is relevant to the show, a submission form for you to fill out.
Keep posted for more details—and read more on MLive’s website: Michigan Film Office approves Detroit-filmed judge show for incentives.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
So is this going to be another Judge Judy show? A close look at the TV show’s website may provide an answer to this: Domestic Justice. It appears that the unique twist of Domestic Justice is that it will employ short-term and long-term counseling and therapy supervision for the participants, and appears that the focus of the “justice” will be on finding resolutions that integrate on-going counseling for everyone involved. The goal is also to provide follow-up segments to track the progress of the people involved in the dispute.
Do you have an issue that you want to submit for “common sense justice?” If so, the website Domestic Justice provides you with a list of questions to answer, and if your issue is relevant to the show, a submission form for you to fill out.
Keep posted for more details—and read more on MLive’s website: Michigan Film Office approves Detroit-filmed judge show for incentives.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Honoring Michigan Mothers
“I’ll be a wife and mother first, then First Lady.” ~Jackie Kennedy
Mother’s Day is this Sunday, and it is fitting to take a moment to honor some Michigan mothers who were not only role models for their own children, but pioneers in their field. Because I am a lawyer, I am obviously drawn to Michigan mothers who were pioneers in the field of law.
Martha Strickland Clark (1853-1935). Martha was a single mother when she began law school at the University of Michigan Law School in 1882. In 1887 she became the first woman lawyer in Detroit. She was also) the first woman to argue a case before the Michigan Supreme Court, and argued that a woman could divorce a husband who was abusing her. She was back in front of the Michigan Supreme Court in 1890 arguing that a woman could hold the office of deputy county clerk. She won both cases.
Rachel Andresen (1907-1988). At the age of 28, Rachel was widowed, left to raise three children on her own. Perhaps this was why she focused on children, founding Youth for Understanding, an international exchange program for high school students. Youth for Understanding still exists today, and provides opportunities for thousands of high school students. For her pioneering work and founding of Youth for Understanding, Rachel was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973.
Anne R. Davidow (1898-1991). Anne was actually denied admittance to the Detroit College of Law because she was a woman. So she attended another law school. She married and had two children, and became famous for a case she argued in front of the United States Supreme Court in 1948, Goesaert v Cleary. In that case, she argued against a law in Michigan that did not allow women to tend bar unless their fathers or husbands owned the bar. While Anne lost the case, the law was actually repealed, and the case of Goesaert v Cleary is taught in law schools around the country.
Cornelia Groefsema Kennedy (1923 - ). Cornelia Kennedy was the second woman to serve as Judge in Wayne County Circuit Court and the first Michigan woman to be appointed to the federal bench by President Nixon in 1970. She was then appointed by President Carter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. I have a special place in my heart for Justice Kennedy. When I had just passed the Michigan Bar, Justice Kennedy administered my oath to the federal bench, and swore me in as an attorney to the United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan. I also had the privilege of working for her son, Charles Kennedy, also a lawyer.
I couldn’t close this without thanking my own mother, Dorothy Sluka, for her constant love and support, for without that, I wouldn’t have the inspiration to be both a mother and lawyer today.
“All mothers are working mothers.” (author unknown). Take a moment this Sunday to thank those mothers who have made a difference in your life.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Mother’s Day is this Sunday, and it is fitting to take a moment to honor some Michigan mothers who were not only role models for their own children, but pioneers in their field. Because I am a lawyer, I am obviously drawn to Michigan mothers who were pioneers in the field of law.
Martha Strickland Clark (1853-1935). Martha was a single mother when she began law school at the University of Michigan Law School in 1882. In 1887 she became the first woman lawyer in Detroit. She was also) the first woman to argue a case before the Michigan Supreme Court, and argued that a woman could divorce a husband who was abusing her. She was back in front of the Michigan Supreme Court in 1890 arguing that a woman could hold the office of deputy county clerk. She won both cases.
Rachel Andresen (1907-1988). At the age of 28, Rachel was widowed, left to raise three children on her own. Perhaps this was why she focused on children, founding Youth for Understanding, an international exchange program for high school students. Youth for Understanding still exists today, and provides opportunities for thousands of high school students. For her pioneering work and founding of Youth for Understanding, Rachel was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973.
Anne R. Davidow (1898-1991). Anne was actually denied admittance to the Detroit College of Law because she was a woman. So she attended another law school. She married and had two children, and became famous for a case she argued in front of the United States Supreme Court in 1948, Goesaert v Cleary. In that case, she argued against a law in Michigan that did not allow women to tend bar unless their fathers or husbands owned the bar. While Anne lost the case, the law was actually repealed, and the case of Goesaert v Cleary is taught in law schools around the country.
Cornelia Groefsema Kennedy (1923 - ). Cornelia Kennedy was the second woman to serve as Judge in Wayne County Circuit Court and the first Michigan woman to be appointed to the federal bench by President Nixon in 1970. She was then appointed by President Carter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. I have a special place in my heart for Justice Kennedy. When I had just passed the Michigan Bar, Justice Kennedy administered my oath to the federal bench, and swore me in as an attorney to the United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan. I also had the privilege of working for her son, Charles Kennedy, also a lawyer.
I couldn’t close this without thanking my own mother, Dorothy Sluka, for her constant love and support, for without that, I wouldn’t have the inspiration to be both a mother and lawyer today.
“All mothers are working mothers.” (author unknown). Take a moment this Sunday to thank those mothers who have made a difference in your life.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Removing the “Sheen” from Celebrity Divorce
Sorry, Charlie. As if Charlie Sheen hasn’t had enough “winning” media coverage—he received even more as his divorce with Brooke Mueller was finalized this week. The media has focused solely on money (big surprise), so all news stories have only discussed the amount of the property settlement and monthly child support award.
However, TMZ posted the actual divorce judgment online here: In Re Marriage of Sheen. There are some interesting things to note in that Judgment other than just how much money was awarded.
First, despite the fact that Charlie and Brooke are celebrities, the custody, parenting time and child support provisions of their Judgment look pretty similar to the provisions that are in most “average Joe” divorce judgments, including those that I have drafted. For example, Charlie and Brooke share legal custody of their 2 year old boys, Bob & Max. While Brooke has sole physical custody, the parenting time is pretty equally shared. Brooke and Charlie share all holidays and have equal vacation time with the kids. They also agreed to allow the other to take the kids out of state without advance written permission from each other. Charlie must provide health insurance for the boys, and Brooke and Charlie agree to equally share the cost of any of the kids’ extra-curricular activities. Brooke and Charlie also agree that neither can make unilateral decisions about where the boys attend school, but if private school is chosen, Charlie will pay the tuition. Those are pretty “normal” provisions in any divorce.
One of the more interesting and unique provisions in the Judgment involves child support. Brooke was awarded $55,000 per month (yes, per month) for child support for the boys. The Judgment goes on to state that Brooke’s child support shall never be less than the child support that Charlie Sheen pays to his other ex-wife, Denise Richards. The Judgment continues, stating that Charlie and Brooke both recognize that Denise has more assets and earning capacity then Brooke, and that Denise’s children have trust funds, while Brooke’s children do not. Thus, the absolute minimum child support that Brooke will receive will never be less than child support paid to Denise. This is a pretty interesting provision because it provides a base child support number without consideration of income or parenting time. This would be a difficult provision to enforce in Michigan.
What else is noteworthy in this Judgment? Well, Brooke signed a prenup or “Premarital Agreement” on May 27, 2008, before she married Charlie. The Divorce Judgment abides by this prenup, which means that Brooke receives zero spousal support. Yes, Brooke waived her right to alimony now and forever. While that may be surprising in this divorce to waive alimony, it is pretty common in most divorces.
Anything else stick out? Brooke agrees to never talk to the media about Charlie’s alleged sexual affairs and alleged drug use, and Charlie agrees never to talk to the media about Brooke’s alleged drug use. Interesting.
By taking a closer look at Charlie and Brooke’s Divorce Judgment, one can easily see that despite their celebrity status, Charlie and Brooke’s issues are resolved in a pretty standard way.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
However, TMZ posted the actual divorce judgment online here: In Re Marriage of Sheen. There are some interesting things to note in that Judgment other than just how much money was awarded.
First, despite the fact that Charlie and Brooke are celebrities, the custody, parenting time and child support provisions of their Judgment look pretty similar to the provisions that are in most “average Joe” divorce judgments, including those that I have drafted. For example, Charlie and Brooke share legal custody of their 2 year old boys, Bob & Max. While Brooke has sole physical custody, the parenting time is pretty equally shared. Brooke and Charlie share all holidays and have equal vacation time with the kids. They also agreed to allow the other to take the kids out of state without advance written permission from each other. Charlie must provide health insurance for the boys, and Brooke and Charlie agree to equally share the cost of any of the kids’ extra-curricular activities. Brooke and Charlie also agree that neither can make unilateral decisions about where the boys attend school, but if private school is chosen, Charlie will pay the tuition. Those are pretty “normal” provisions in any divorce.
One of the more interesting and unique provisions in the Judgment involves child support. Brooke was awarded $55,000 per month (yes, per month) for child support for the boys. The Judgment goes on to state that Brooke’s child support shall never be less than the child support that Charlie Sheen pays to his other ex-wife, Denise Richards. The Judgment continues, stating that Charlie and Brooke both recognize that Denise has more assets and earning capacity then Brooke, and that Denise’s children have trust funds, while Brooke’s children do not. Thus, the absolute minimum child support that Brooke will receive will never be less than child support paid to Denise. This is a pretty interesting provision because it provides a base child support number without consideration of income or parenting time. This would be a difficult provision to enforce in Michigan.
What else is noteworthy in this Judgment? Well, Brooke signed a prenup or “Premarital Agreement” on May 27, 2008, before she married Charlie. The Divorce Judgment abides by this prenup, which means that Brooke receives zero spousal support. Yes, Brooke waived her right to alimony now and forever. While that may be surprising in this divorce to waive alimony, it is pretty common in most divorces.
Anything else stick out? Brooke agrees to never talk to the media about Charlie’s alleged sexual affairs and alleged drug use, and Charlie agrees never to talk to the media about Brooke’s alleged drug use. Interesting.
By taking a closer look at Charlie and Brooke’s Divorce Judgment, one can easily see that despite their celebrity status, Charlie and Brooke’s issues are resolved in a pretty standard way.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Jail for Former Red Wings Trainer: Unpaid Child Support
The Detroit News reported that former Red Wings’ trainer John Wharton was arrested and jailed for unpaid child support: Former Wings trainer Wharton jailed on child-support charges. It appears he had been arrested before for unpaid child support, but paid a bond and then left the state moving to New York. He recently returned to Michigan, however, and was arrested again on a warrant issued by the Michigan Attorney General.
In Michigan, child support obligations are enforced by not only the courts, but also the local prosecutors and even the attorney general’s office. For non-payment of child support, the Friend of the Court can garnish your tax refunds, suspend your driver’s license, file a lien against your property, report the debt to credit agencies, garnish a private pension or retirement, and issue a bench warrant for your arrest. Additionally, in cases where the amount of support owing is excessive, the Friend of the Court can refer the case to the local prosecutor for felony charges. Felony non-support cases can also result in jail sentences.
What people don’t always realize is that child support is modifiable in Michigan. The Friend of the Court can conduct an automatic review of child support every 36 months. However, if there is a substantial change in income, a parent can file a request for modification and have it reviewed, even if it hasn’t been 36 months.
The court and Attorney General will also work with parents on overdue support. However, an effort must be made to make timely payments, and if the parent is unemployed, to find viable employment.
The lesson is clear—if there is a substantial change in income, it is important to request modification of child support. If the person paying child support becomes delinquent, the penalties can be excessive and extreme, and, in some cases, avoidable.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
In Michigan, child support obligations are enforced by not only the courts, but also the local prosecutors and even the attorney general’s office. For non-payment of child support, the Friend of the Court can garnish your tax refunds, suspend your driver’s license, file a lien against your property, report the debt to credit agencies, garnish a private pension or retirement, and issue a bench warrant for your arrest. Additionally, in cases where the amount of support owing is excessive, the Friend of the Court can refer the case to the local prosecutor for felony charges. Felony non-support cases can also result in jail sentences.
What people don’t always realize is that child support is modifiable in Michigan. The Friend of the Court can conduct an automatic review of child support every 36 months. However, if there is a substantial change in income, a parent can file a request for modification and have it reviewed, even if it hasn’t been 36 months.
The court and Attorney General will also work with parents on overdue support. However, an effort must be made to make timely payments, and if the parent is unemployed, to find viable employment.
The lesson is clear—if there is a substantial change in income, it is important to request modification of child support. If the person paying child support becomes delinquent, the penalties can be excessive and extreme, and, in some cases, avoidable.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Splitting the House in a Divorce…. Literally
The 6 year divorce case of New York’s Simon and Chana Taub was recently finalized by order of the court last week. Yes, it was a 6 year divorce. And no, the fact that it took 6 years is not the only shocking fact about this divorce.
One of the issues that the Taubs fought intensely about was who would live in their 3 story brownstone in Brooklyn. When they both refused to move out while the divorce was pending, they split the house. Literally. They installed a wall down the middle of the house so they could both live there.
If that gives you flashbacks to the movie “War of the Roses” then you are spot on.
However, the Judge ordered that the house now be sold. Neither Simon nor Chana Taub will be able to keep the house. Can the Judge do this? Can the Judge order that the house be sold?
Absolutely. Judges in family court can dispose of the marital assets in any way that they determine is fair and equitable. Even in Michigan, if two people are fighting over a house, or any piece of property for that matter, the Judge will likely just order that it be sold. Selling the property definitely ends the dispute about who gets it.
In Michigan, selling property is sometimes a complicated solution because of the real estate market and downward economy. However, it is often the only equitable decision if the divorcing couple continues to fight over who keeps the house, and refuses to settle the issue themselves.
You can read more about Simon and Chana Taub’s divorce here: NYC couple who split house with wall get divorce.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
One of the issues that the Taubs fought intensely about was who would live in their 3 story brownstone in Brooklyn. When they both refused to move out while the divorce was pending, they split the house. Literally. They installed a wall down the middle of the house so they could both live there.
If that gives you flashbacks to the movie “War of the Roses” then you are spot on.
However, the Judge ordered that the house now be sold. Neither Simon nor Chana Taub will be able to keep the house. Can the Judge do this? Can the Judge order that the house be sold?
Absolutely. Judges in family court can dispose of the marital assets in any way that they determine is fair and equitable. Even in Michigan, if two people are fighting over a house, or any piece of property for that matter, the Judge will likely just order that it be sold. Selling the property definitely ends the dispute about who gets it.
In Michigan, selling property is sometimes a complicated solution because of the real estate market and downward economy. However, it is often the only equitable decision if the divorcing couple continues to fight over who keeps the house, and refuses to settle the issue themselves.
You can read more about Simon and Chana Taub’s divorce here: NYC couple who split house with wall get divorce.
If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)