Relocation with your Child

When a client called today to discuss relocation, I thought I should ad a Relocation note to this blog.

 

 As you review, please realize there is no consideration for high assets or significant income inequality in consideration under these rules.

 

Relocation is covered by Florida Statute 61.13001. In the absence of an agreement between the parties, a court must answer the following questions in order to determine Relocation is in the Best Interests of the Child. (Best Interests of the Child is the standard, NOT best interests of the Adult)

the court shall evaluate all of the following:

(a) The nature, quality, extent of involvement, and duration of the child’s relationship with the parent or other person proposing to relocate with the child and with the nonrelocating parent, other persons, siblings, half-siblings, and other significant persons in the child’s life.

 

(b) The age and developmental stage of the child, the needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation will have on the child’s physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child.

 

(c) The feasibility of preserving the relationship between the nonrelocating parent or other person and the child through substitute arrangements that take into consideration the logistics of contact, access, and time-sharing, as well as the financial circumstances of the parties; whether those factors are sufficient to foster a continuing meaningful relationship between the child and the nonrelocating parent or other person; and the likelihood of compliance with the substitute arrangements by the relocating parent or other person once he or she is out of the jurisdiction of the court.

 

(d) The child’s preference, taking into consideration the age and maturity of the child.

 

(e) Whether the relocation will enhance the general quality of life for both the parent or other person seeking the relocation and the child, including, but not limited to, financial or emotional benefits or educational opportunities.

 

(f) The reasons each parent or other person is seeking or opposing the relocation.

 

(g) The current employment and economic circumstances of each parent or other person and whether the proposed relocation is necessary to improve the economic circumstances of the parent or other person seeking relocation of the child.

 

(h) That the relocation is sought in good faith and the extent to which the objecting parent has fulfilled his or her financial obligations to the parent or other person seeking relocation, including child support, spousal support, and marital property and marital debt obligations.

 

(i) The career and other opportunities available to the objecting parent or other person if the relocation occurs.

 

(j) A history of substance abuse or domestic violence as defined in s. 741.28 or which meets the criteria of s. 39.806(1)(d) by either parent, including a consideration of the severity of such conduct and the failure or success of any attempts at rehabilitation.

 

(k) Any other factor affecting the best interest of the child or as set forth in s. 61.13.

 Of course, (k) introduces a completely new set of factors for the court to consider in determining the Best Interests of the Child.

Section (3) of Florida Statutes 61.13 is as follows:
For purposes of establishing or modifying parental responsibility and creating, developing, approving, or modifying a parenting plan, including a time-sharing schedule, which governs each parent’s relationship with his or her minor child and the relationship between each parent with regard to his or her minor child, the best interest of the child shall be the primary consideration. A determination of parental responsibility, a parenting plan, or a time-sharing schedule may not be modified without a showing of a substantial, material, and unanticipated change in circumstances and a determination that the modification is in the best interests of the child. Determination of the best interests of the child shall be made by evaluating all of the factors affecting the welfare and interests of the particular minor child and the circumstances of that family, including, but not limited to:

(a) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship, to honor the time-sharing schedule, and to be reasonable when changes are required.

 

(b) The anticipated division of parental responsibilities after the litigation, including the extent to which parental responsibilities will be delegated to third parties.

 

(c) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to determine, consider, and act upon the needs of the child as opposed to the needs or desires of the parent.

 

(d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment and the desirability of maintaining continuity.

 

(e) The geographic viability of the parenting plan, with special attention paid to the needs of school-age children and the amount of time to be spent traveling to effectuate the parenting plan. This factor does not create a presumption for or against relocation of either parent with a child.

(f) The moral fitness of the parents.

 

(g) The mental and physical health of the parents.

 

(h) The home, school, and community record of the child.

 

(i) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court deems the child to be of sufficient intelligence, understanding, and experience to express a preference.

 

(j) The demonstrated knowledge, capacity, and disposition of each parent to be informed of the circumstances of the minor child, including, but not limited to, the child’s friends, teachers, medical care providers, daily activities, and favorite things.

 

(k) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to provide a consistent routine for the child, such as discipline, and daily schedules for homework, meals, and bedtime.

 

(l) The demonstrated capacity of each parent to communicate with and keep the other parent informed of issues and activities regarding the minor child, and the willingness of each parent to adopt a unified front on all major issues when dealing with the child.

 

(m) Evidence of domestic violence, sexual violence, child abuse, child abandonment, or child neglect, regardless of whether a prior or pending action relating to those issues has been brought. If the court accepts evidence of prior or pending actions regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, child abuse, child abandonment, or child neglect, the court must specifically acknowledge in writing that such evidence was considered when evaluating the best interests of the child.

 

(n) Evidence that either parent has knowingly provided false information to the court regarding any prior or pending action regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, child abuse, child abandonment, or child neglect.

 

(o) The particular parenting tasks customarily performed by each parent and the division of parental responsibilities before the institution of litigation and during the pending litigation, including the extent to which parenting responsibilities were undertaken by third parties.

 

(p) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to participate and be involved in the child’s school and extracurricular activities.

 

(q) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to maintain an environment for the child which is free from substance abuse.

 

(r) The capacity and disposition of each parent to protect the child from the ongoing litigation as demonstrated by not discussing the litigation with the child, not sharing documents or electronic media related to the litigation with the child, and refraining from disparaging comments about the other parent to the child.

 

(s) The developmental stages and needs of the child and the demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to meet the child’s developmental needs.

 

(t) Any other factor that is relevant to the determination of a specific parenting plan, including the time-sharing schedule.

 

Again, the court is allowed to consider "ANY OTHER FACTOR THAT IS RELEVANT!"

 

It is imperative to have an attorney that understands these factors and how to present evidence on each one.

 

Call today: 407-645-3297 or visit Aubreylaw.com for a consultation on your particular case!

How Expensive Is a Divorce?

For some, VERY Expensive.
An Alimony check made out for $974,790,317.77 seems a little high. When you consider the man writing the check has a net worth of more than $8 Billion, well, lets just say they are still in court!

You can read about it here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/01/08/harold-hamms-975-million-uncashed-divorce-check-how-about-deducting-it/

You can even learn a little about taxes and Divorce Settlements here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2014/11/11/harold-hamms-billion-dollar-divorce-and-the-irs/2/

In reality, a Divorce can be expensive or cheap, depending upon your desires. If you seek maximum conflict, then expensive it is. If you want years of legal wrangling, go with cheap.

My office strives for efficiently extricating clients from difficulties. We want to prevent problems next year by doing the hard work now. Many times, clients see their dreams realized by selecting Collaborative Divorce and making their own decisions.

Where there are High Assets, people may want to limit their exposure to the public and to continuing attorneys fees and court costs. Collaboration is the way to go.

Visit my website to learn more: www.aubreylaw.com
or simply pick up the phone and call 407-645-3297.
I look forward to hearing from you.

Attorney Ratings are Important - Ask!

Attorney Aubrey H. Ducker Jr has Achieved the AV Preeminent^® Rating - the Highest Possible Rating from Martindale-Hubbell^®.

Aubrey H. Ducker Jr, a lawyer based in Winter Park, FL whose primary area of practice is Family Law, has earned the AV Preeminent^® rating from Martindale-Hubbell^®

Winter Park, FL (PR Newswire) January 28, 2014 - Martindale-Hubbell^® has confirmed that attorney Aubrey H. Ducker Jr still maintains the AV Preeminent Rating, Martindale-Hubbell's highest possible rating for both ethical standards and legal ability, even after first achieving this rating in 2012.
For more than 130 years, lawyers have relied on the Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent^® rating while searching for their own expert attorneys. Now anyone can make use of this trusted rating by looking up a lawyer's rating on Lawyers.com or martindale.com. The Martindale-Hubbell^® AV Preeminent^® rating is the highest possible rating for an attorney for both ethical standards and legal ability. This rating represents the pinnacle of professional excellence. It is achieved only after an attorney has been reviewed and recommended by their peers - members of the bar and the judiciary. Congratulations go to Aubrey H. Ducker Jr who has achieved the AV Preeminent^® Rating from Martindale-Hubbell^®.

Aubrey H. Ducker Jr commented on the recognition: "The Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Rating is a credential highly valued and sought after in the legal world. It used to be a sort of secret among attorneys who used the rating as a first screen when they needed to hire a lawyer they did not personally know. Now, thanks to the Internet, the Rating is a great way for anyone – lawyers or lay people - to use to screen lawyers. I am thankful to my peers who nominated me for this distinction, and proud to have earned this, the highest possible Martindale-Hubbell rating."

To find out more or to contact Aubrey H. Ducker Jr of Winter Park, FL, call 407-645-3297, or visit http://www.aubreylaw.com.

As a result of this honor, American Registry LLC, has added Aubrey H. Ducker Jr to The Registry™ of Business and Professional Excellence. For more information, search The Registry™ at http://www.americanregistry.com.

Contact Information:
Aubrey H. Ducker Jr

Phone: 407-645-3297

Email Address: AubreyLaw@gmail.com

Website: http://www.aubreylaw.com

Attorney Aubrey H. Ducker Jr has Achieved the AV Preeminent^® Rating - the Highest Possible Rating from Martindale-Hubbell^®.

Collaborative Divorce

In a Collaborative Divorce, the husband and wife communicate their goals to a team of professionals who assist in keeping the mutual goals as paramount as the marriage comes to an end.

The Wife and Husband make all decisions, Not the Judge. Not the Attorneys. The Parties to the Marriage maintain control of their marriage and control of their divorce. Adults know sometimes bad things happen to good people. Adults know bad incidence do not define life. Adults know that hard choices require full disclosure of risks and benefits.

Collaborative Attorneys know Moms and Dads make decisions in their children and families' best interests when given the opportunity and assistance.
When you are faced with Marital Problems that seem beyond your control, call me. You have the control if you will only select the right tool for the job. Litigation is the wrong tool for most families.

My number is 407-645-3297. Or visit my website www.aubreylaw.com

I look forward to assisting your family in keeping priorities in perspective and making the right decisions.

A Divorce Lawyer's Advice on Marriage

How long have you been married? 25 years. I used to answer that question, "13 years, but it feels like forever." I was not meaning an insult, simply stating that I felt like I had always been with my wife. Strange then that I ended up ending marriages for profit. I don't actually end the marriage, I just do the paperwork, and get the court's approval.

The New York Times (www.nytimes.com) had two articles leading up to Valentines' Month that really hit on the issues of marriage, especially Long Term Marriage.

The first, Does Equal Marriage Mean Less Sex, compares the division of chores and the division of income to find a prosperous balance of work while maintaining sexual stereotypes of work division. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/magazine/does-a-more-equal-marriage-mean-less-sex.html
Both funny and illustrative, the article comes up with the following proper division for pure marital bliss:   The risk of divorce is lowest when the husband does 40 percent of the housework and the wife earns 40 percent of the income.
Wish I had known that before I got engaged! My wife was an attorney when we met, and I was a Sailor. Not the romantic type on a yacht or sailing ship, the enlisted type, E-3. The difference in our incomes was quite staggering. Thankfully, after putting me through college and law school, my wife continues to practice, and our incomes greatly changed. I don't know how to divide housework, but I like doing most of the cooking. I prefer to do the 'man jobs' as well, but she routinely takes out the trash or takes the rolling carts to the street.

Daniel Jones, editor of Modern Love writes another article, Good Enough? That's Great! listing several types of people and problems with long term marriages, some of which might lead to awards of alimony, unequal equitable distribution and many other problems during a litigated divorce. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/fashion/good-enough-thats-great.html
"Those Who Sneak," as Jones calls them, are the primary pool of potential clients of most attorneys. We all know someone who is just one phone call, text or picture away from a nasty divorce fight. Of course they are the 'quiet victim' in their own mind. The philanderers, cheaters, letches and creeps follow stereotypes that prove the rule. When I hear women say, "all men are dogs" or "he just can't keep it in his pants" I am seldom sympathetic.
Then there are the people Jones refers to as the Quashers.
Quashers suppress their feelings of slights in order to keep their little world safe. Don't upset him. Don't make her angry. Just get over the feelings of anger, hurt, humiliation and fear. It won't happen again, until it does, and once again, they will quash their own feelings, desires, emotions to keep the family safe.

Finally there are the Restorers. Jones writes, "When a restorer couple’s marriage starts to feel subpar, they sit down and have a sensible discussion about where their marriage is and where they would like it to be. Then they set goals and seek the means to achieve those goals. Typically affluent, educated and highly motivated, restorer couples almost single-handedly support the vast and profitable marriage-improvement industry." These are the people who choose Collaborative Marriage and Collaborative Divorce when necessary.

In a Collaborative Divorce, the husband and wife communicate their goals to a team of professionals who assist in keeping the mutual goals as paramount as the marriage comes to an end. The Wife and Husband make all decisions, Not the Judge. Not the Attorneys. The Parties to the Marriage maintain control of their marriage and control of their divorce. Adults know sometimes bad things happen to good people. Adults know bad incidence do not define life. Adults know that hard choices require full disclosure of risks and benefits. Collaborative Attorneys know Moms and Dads make decisions in their children and families' best interests when given the opportunity and assistance.

Call me at 407-645-3297 or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com
I look forward to helping your family in its time of crisis.

On Marriage and Divorce, Collaborative Style

We can't all have a marriage like Jay Z and Beyoncé. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/arts/music/beyonce-and-jay-zs-sultry-dance-makes-a-case-for-marriage.html  But can we all have the benefits? Married partners who truly express their love, can be affirming for others. Couples who share their "dirty laundry" can make the rest of us uncomfortable. Are you happy in your marriage? There are certainly benefits, but some may be overstated.

Recently an article in the New York Times caught my eye: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/magazine/can-marriage-cure-poverty.html?hpw&rref=magazine
Titled, Can Marriage Cure Poverty, the article explores the idea that married couples are somehow boosted from the poorhouse through collective gain. While it is an easy assumption that two parties can live more efficiently than one, I think this article places too much emphasis on raw statistical analysis and too little on evidence of life realities in the 21st century.
Actually the opinion piece is critical of Florida Senator Marco Rubio for his statements on the subject. At a speech by Rubio last month he stated: In 1964, “93 percent of children born in the United States were born to married parents. By 2010 that number had plummeted to 60 percent.”
Rubio was really criticizing President Johnson and the War on Poverty, Johnson’s governmental campaign to boost the opportunity and incomes of the poor, begun in 1964. So on the 50th anniversary of the War on Poverty,  Rubio calls marriage “the greatest tool to lift children and families from poverty.” How nice. If only the other 7% of children had had married parents, there would have been no poverty to declare war upon.
Very Naïve Senator.

Another article details the other end of the spectrum: Divorce among the 1%.  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/business/breakup-at-740-park-avenue.html?_r=0
As Julie Creswell writes, "This is a story of marriage and money in the 16-room, five-and-a-half-bath duplex world of luxury Manhattan real estate." What might be referred to as a High Asset Divorce.
The story goes on to detail the catastrophe of the Great Recession as it inspires the rich to seek divorce. Unfortunately, as unhappy marriages sometimes go, there was an allegation of a drunken assault, resulting police intervention. From there the story is all too familiar. Any equitable distribution must consider allegations of a post-nuptial agreement, claims of ownership of jewelry, insurance proceeds taken by fraud, ashtrays valuations, and all manner of argument. Collaborative Law might have helped out this situation. I wonder if Senator Rubio warned them of the poverty headed their way? Perhaps he should have because bankruptcy filings are mentioned throughout the story.

Parents must make real choices for their children. Preservation of assets may seem as though one party simply wants all the pie while leaving the cleanup to others. Actually, children of divorce have higher incidence of teen pregnancy, school disciplinary problems, and criminal activity when compared to their friends of happily married parents.

In a collaborative practice, we seek to allow parents to make the decisions normally left to the judge. We allow parents to find the best result for their family even if it is not exactly like the law may imply. What is best for your family? If divorce is being discussed, Collaborative Law should be considered.

If you have questions, call me 407-645-3297 or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com
          I look forward to hearing from you!

Multiple Wives, Multiple Husbands, Not at the Same Time

The title needs work, but in essence, Should Polygamy be allowed for consenting adults? How should Polygamy be recognized in the Courts? What are the benefits and costs of such relationships?

The New York Times (www.nytimes.com) has a great debate of 6 "experts" comparing their pros and cons in today's online edition. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/12/17/should-plural-marriage-be-legal
 One or two writers are concerned for the rights of women in these multiple relationship marriages, but all writers assume that the multiples will be women and not men. So very sexist.

A Step in the Wrong Direction

W. Bradford Wilcox, the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia and a senior fellow at the Institute for Family Studies, is the author of “Gender and Parenthood: Biological and Social Scientific Perspectives.” He is on Twitter.

Polygamy Is Bad for Women

Shoshana Grossbard is a professor of economics emerita at San Diego State University and a visiting professor of economics at the University of Zaragoza. In 2010, she testified as an expert witness at a constitutional reference case in British Columbia aimed at determining the validity of Canada's polygamy law.

Two writers deftly compare the Gay  Marriage debate with Polygamy:

Enough With the Scare Tactics

John Corvino, chairman of the philosophy department at Wayne State University, is the author of "What’s Wrong With Homosexuality?"

 

Legally, No Different From Same-Sex Unions

Ron Den Otter is an associate professor of political science at Cal Poly San Luis Opisbo.

 

While another is ready to open all doors:

We Are a Nation of Boundary Breakers

Melynda Price is an associate professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law and blogs at Thoughts of an Ivory Tower Interloper.

 

Finally a writer pleads for intelligent debate and compassion with regard to laws that define the most basic human relationships.

Understanding Who ‘They’ Are

Ralph Richard Banks, the Jackson Eli Reynolds professor of law at Stanford Law School, is the author of "Is Marriage for White People? How the African American Marriage Decline Affects Everyone."

 

Of course as a Collaborative Divorce Attorney, I am in favor of Adults making their own decisions with regard to both the making of marriage contracts and the breaking up of same. If you find the discussions above interesting, visit my website, www.aubreylaw.com or drop me an email aubreylaw@gmail.com , or call me at 407-645-3297. I look forward to hearing from you!

What does a Top Tier Divorce Lawyer Offer?

The Top Ten List is here: http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/27/power-of-10-the-secrets-of-an-a-list-divorce-attorney/?src=rechp

If you want to see how I measure up, visit my website www.aubreylaw.com or just call me: 407-645-3297.

I love the New York Times

Recently on a trip to New York City, I had the opportunity to see a baseball game. The Yankees were NOT in town as is so often the case when I am in NYC, so as I always do, I went to a METS game. The Mets colors match my Florida Gators and they had a promotion going on where you could get a free Jersey for subscribing to the New York Times. The Jersey was Black, with orange and blue trim. My Winter Park High School Wildcats team colors are Black and Orange, the same as my son's school, Tusculum College. Win the Trifecta of Spectator Apparel!

The cost of subscribing to the New York Times was only $17 per month, less than 1/4 of the price of the jersey in the store. Win again!

Now, I get the Sunday NY Times each weekend. I get the daily electronic version http://www.nytimes.com/ of the paper on my computer each day. Win Again!

Best of all, I really Love the New York Times. The articles are well written, informative and in depth. For example, in my Elder Law practice, I often deal with grandparents who have lost touch with their children and grandchildren. An opinion piece today, related one person's experience with similar situations. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/forgetting-grandma/ Elders can always find additional assistance with the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, NAELA, and in Florida, Florida Academy of Elder Law Attorneys.
Some stories appear just entertaining but as you read them you notice so much more and learn more than you ever planned to consider. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/fashion/weddings/divorce-whisperer-mediating-with-parents-isnt-easy-field-notes.html

A story just two weeks ago really set me thinking about my Family Law practice. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/10/your-money/from-a-divorce-in-the-affluent-class-lessons-for-all.html?pagewanted=all In high asset divorces, the emotional impact may be the same as others, but the financial wrangling can overwhelm parties who are accustomed to little worry over daily finances. I have worked to promote Collaborative Divorce in my area of practice and today saw the benefit first hand as my client walked into court, answered a question from the judge and walked out with her divorce 20 minutes later. Yes, we had filed the case 60 days ago. Yes, there were other meetings between the parties and their attorneys. Yes, there were many complex papers to complete; however, for the clients, we removed most of the stress of being in court and having others decide what would become of their lives. The Clients were the only ones making decisions about their family. The Lawyers, the Judge, the System did NOT decide who got what or paid how much to whom.

Even a simple search on the New York Times finds support for the Collaborative Process. http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch/#/Collaborative+divorce/ More than 30 articles appear, and the list keeps growing, showing the financial, psychological and Family benefits of Collaborative Divorce. Every now and then, I am truly proud of what we do in helping families improve their lives.

I love spending just a few minutes reading the paper each day. Now I have to be careful not to get caught up in following one great article after another in the NY Times. If I can be of assistance to you or your family, please call me at 407-645-3297 or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com

Ask Your Attorney to Attend!

Modification Workshop – Orlando, FL August 26, 2013

 

 

Event Details

Track I: 8 Hour Course (Includes 1 hour ethics) for Mediators: Residential Mortgage Modification Course pursuant to Administrative Order 2013-3 for inclusion on the Bankruptcy Court panel of mediators for the United States Bankruptcy Court, Middle District of Florida
Track II: 8 Hour Course (Includes 1 hour ethics) for Attorneys, Staff and Law Students: Successful Mortgage Mediation through Bankruptcy

Time

8:30 a.m. – 4:35 p.m.

Cost

Early Registration through August 18, 2013
Attorney / Mediator: $349.00
Staff: $249.00
Law Students: $150.00
Late Registration begins August 19, 2013
Attorney / Mediator: $399.00
Staff: $299.00
Law Students: $199.00
Flash drive of materials and resource tools are provided. Binder cost is $75.00

Location

UCF Executive Development Center at Ying Academic Center
University of Central Florida
36 West Pine Street
Orlando, Florida 32801

View Larger Map
For parking details, click here: Directions and Parking to EDC 2011
Hotel Information: Crown Plaza Hotel Orlando

• Workshops

"Family Circus" Best - Not in Court

One of my favorite cartoons is Family Circus. One of my favorite cartoons included the following exchange between the characters 3 year old and 6 year old siblings:

Why are you crying?

Mom and Dad are yelling at each other.

But at least they are not yelling at you!

I know, but if they were yelling at me, at least I'd understand it!

Family conflict is difficult for children to understand. When parents fail to communicate, or communicate in abusive ways, children suffer the most, primarily because they do not understand. They try to understand Love through their parents' teaching, but when parents resort to yelling, children become stressed because they do not understand!
Mommy and Daddy love each other.
Mommy and Daddy love me.
Mommy and Daddy are yelling at each other.
Mommy and Daddy will yell at me.
So goes childhood logic. Children resort to acting out. Parents resort to discipline. The Spiral of Conflict has begun. Where will it end?

Collaborative Divorce seeks to place two parents on equal terms for communication with a trained guide to assist in adult, two-way communication. Many parents say they communicate better after a Collaborative Divorce than they Ever Did in the marriage.

What a shame we cannot get the communications right before the Marriage is endangered.

When you have questions regarding a Collaborative Divorce, Call me!
I will teach you effective ways to communicate.

High Asset Divorce and Collaboration

Greed, trust and divorce.
How much is enough?
If you built a home together with your spouse and later divorced, you might expect to sell the home and divide the proceeds. What if you bought an exisiting home, improved it, watched it grow as an asset, and then decided to part ways? Would you trust your spouse to accurately represent its value? Would you get an appraisal?

What if your spouse forced you out of the home and then claimed the home was worth less than you thought; then your spouse worked out a secret deal to sell the home while telling you it was appraised at a certain value, inducing you to sign a Marital Settlement Agreement.

You might think this is Fraud. You might think your attorney should have done more to check on the value of the marital home. You might ask the court to throw out the settlement agreement due to fraud.

If the "Home" was the Los Angeles Dodgers, and the value asserted to you was $300 Million, and you settled your divorce for $144 Million, you might be very upset to learn the Dodgers were sold two weeks later for $2 Billion Dollars. Two Billion Dollars make a much larger pile of cash than $144 Million.

http://gma.yahoo.com/jamie-mccourt-claims-foul-pitch-131m-divorce-002230290--abc-news-celebrities.html

The McCourts Divorce has been news for a while.  Do the words Greed, Trust, Divorce, Marital Asset, of Fraud seem different in light of the story above?  The comments following it consistently fault the Wife for being "greedy" or "not doing her homework" or "not being happy with what she agreed to and received." Forget that the law indicates the "property" should be divided EQUALLY. Most observers fault her for wanting a fair share. Some comments from women are the Most appalling: "Oh come on! Take the $131 million and be happy, you old witch. I'm 59, no longer pretty, and would love a payload of $131 million for any reason. Don't get greedy. Were you the driving force behind your ex's success? I think not."

In reality, the former Mrs. McCourt was intimately involved in the Dodgers operations up until "he 'fired' her, and 'from that point forward, he completely excluded her from every aspect of management...'
Clients in Collaborative Divorce proceedings have certain luxuries that litigated cases do not afford. One feature is communication. Communication breeds trust. Trust overcomes greed. Everyone walks away much healthier, happier and overall less combative.

In a Collaborative Divorce, we work together to help you make intelligent decisions affecting your family. Many clients find Collaborative Divorce encourages more honest communications and disclosures while minimizing the costs to your family. One of the best features of a Collaborative Divorce may be keeing your private information and affairs PRIVATE. Noone has to know until you decide what to tell them.

If you would like a private consultation regarding your rights under Florida Law, please call me at (407) 645-3297, or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com
You can also send an email to aubrey@aubreylaw.com or aubreylaw@gmail.com
Don't allow yourself to be cheated. You have certain rights under the law, but you must insist they be enforced. A

Senate Bill 718 and House Bill 231

TURNING BACK THE CLOCK on 30 years of progress in Family Law
An Update and Plea to Help Stop this Travesty

Recently the Florida House passed HB 231 mandating changes to divorce law that will make marriage much more palatable and divorce much easier. You see, if this becomes law, no man will fear alimony or child support. Changes proposed will END permanent alimony (never mind that permanent alimony is almost universally not permanent today). Changes will also guarantee child support will be minimal and discretionary. If the primary breadwinner doesn't want to pay support, they are guaranteed 50/50 timeshare, and can easily ask for more to "allow the other spouse maximum time to work" thereby lowering child support to next to nothing. Forget deadbeats, no order will issue requiring support while fighting it out.

OK, those are worst case scenarios, but anything is possible when this legislature is in session!

Here are some of the proposed changes:

- application of these new rules retroactively to alimony awards entered (within the past 15 years by agreement) regardless of whether the support was based upon the agreement of the parties or court ordered after trial;

- litigation of alimony changes carries a risk of attorneys fees, just for contesting the changes in court;

- The new law would REQUIRE the proof of increased income AND for TWO YEARS of increased income to be deemed permanent. Quite a hurdle for the person receiving alimony. There is no such requirement should the obligor seek to obtain downward modification. Oh, my pay went down, so I don't have to prove it or show the decreased income lasted 2 years.

- Possibly the Worst idea: The new law includes a presumption for 50/50 timesharing except in very limited circumstances (prove a danger to the child's health, safety and welfare)(this applies in ALL cases not just divorcing parents)

Another bad idea: if the obligor is unemployed at the time of the dissolution the spouse has to wait a full two years after they become employed before asking for spousal support to be modified. So, lose your job just prior to divorce and 2 years without alimony will certainly punish your former spouse for wanting a divorce!

If this passes out of the Senate tomorrow afternoon, and it looks probable, it will be on the House floor next week and then off to the Governor shortly thereafter. The Family Law Section is doing what it can to defeat these bills, having committed to a grassroots and media campaign to get the word out, but those efforts are going to run short without your help. I am therefore asking that if you have not done so in anticipation of this bill being voted upon by the full Senate tomorrow that you please contact your Senators and, after tomorrow, your Representatives (or all Senators and all Representatives) http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/Find and http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Representatives/representatives.aspx and urge them to oppose this legislation. Then, remember how they voted when they run for office next time.

 

Call me at 407-645-3297 or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com

Aubrey

Brain Gym - Excercise Your Mind

My mother works the Sudoku puzzel every day. Many people work on crossword puzzels, or brain teasers daily. These activities help keep the mind working and can (according to research) stall or prevent alzheimers, dementia and other brain lag that typically occurs with aging.

http://www.kenneymyers.com/blog/24-blogs-with-things-you-can-do-to-keep-your-brain-sharp-as-you-age/

Somebody asked that I put this link in my blog, and I trust you will enjoy the link.

Call me when you have legal questions at 407-645-3297, especially those questions related to Collaborative Divorce, Elder Law, Family Law, Guardianships and HAMP tier I and Tier II Mortgage Modifications.

Or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com

Collaborative Divorce Saves Money, Time and Stress

Almost every month the Collaborative Family Law Group of Central Florida http://www.cfl-cfl.com/ meets to discuss ways we can help our clients save money, save time and save stress when pursuing a divorce. Sometimes we meet together at the Mount Vernon Inn on 17-92.
http://bestwesternflorida.com/hotels/best-western-mount-vernon-inn/ 
Other times we meet in one of four practice groups at various offices in the area. Each time we meet, we learn new ways to discuss, facilitate, encourage, coach or counsel our clients.
The International Association of Collaborative Professionals http://collaborativepractice.com/ is an international community of legal, mental health and financial professionals working in concert to create client-centered processes for resolving conflict. Supporting Collaborative Practice as a conflict resolution option, its Mission is:

• establishing and upholding the essential elements, ethical and practice standards of Collaborative Practice;
• fostering professional excellence by educating and providing resources to Collaborative practitioners;
• leading and integrating the Collaborative community; and
• promoting the growth of Collaborative Practice.

Why would you want a Collaborative Professional? Because it saves you Time, Money, Resources, and most of all STRESS! In a Collaborative Divorce, YOU make the Decisions in concert with your spouse and several professionals selected to assist.

You get to select a single Financial Professional to assess your family's finances to maximize child support and alimony so that limited resources are stretched for the family's benefit.

You get to select a Mental Health Professional who coaches you in communication. Many graduates of a Collaborative Divorce find they are much better able to communicate than ever during their marriage.

You get to decide how and when you get divorced; there is no waiting on a response from the other side, the court, a deposition, etc.

You are not alone in these decisions! You have help from several professionals who work daily in these situations. Our collective experience and expertise HELP you Make Decisions!

Call me at 407-645-3297 or visit my website at www.aubreylaw.com and ask how we can help you seek a Collaborative Divorce. Aubrey