Tiger Woods Divorce Finally Done.
Tiger Woods is now officially divorced. The Decree of Divorce has been published. No particulars yet about specific divorce settlement terms.
For information on Arizona divorce, contact one of our lawyers at NGS.
Financial Support in Military Cases
Michael S. Archer and CPT Tricia L. Birdsell provide a detailed analysis regarding the pitfalls civilian attorneys can encounter in cases involving military support issues.
Military support issues arise frequently in Arizona due to the presence of Luke Airforce Base, as well as other military installations in the Southwest. If you or your spouse are in the military, each branch of service requires certain support obligations upon separation for both dependents and spouses. This article details the steps one must take in each branch of the military to obtain support, how to calculate the support obligation, as well as how a waiver of the obligation can be obtained by the military spouse.
Continue Reading...Sandra Bullock and Jesse James Finalize Divorce
The pair filed divorce papers under seal last week in Texas to finalize their divorce after their nearly five-year marriage crumbled amid reports of cheating by James, PEOPLE confirms.
The Oscar-winning actress, 45, initiated the divorce case in April in Texas, where she has a home. The papers cited "discord or conflict of personalities" as the reason for the split.
Bullock's rep confirmed Monday that the divorce is now final.
Though it's unclear if the two had a prenuptial agreement, James won't be entitled to spousal support since in Texas a spouse must be married for at least 10 years to qualify for support. In Arizona, there is no similar time requirement for a spouse to be entitled to spousal support, or as it is sometimes referred to as spousal maintenance and/or alimony.
NGS Wishes Attorney Brian D. Carroll, Esq. "All The Best"
It is with great sadness and also joy that Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC (NGS) announces the departure of Brian D. Carroll, Esq., an associate attorney with the firm, whose practice primarly focused on divorce and family court matters. Mr. Carroll began his legal career with NGS in its summer law clerk internship program and continued as an attorney after his admission to the State Bar of Arizona.
Mr. Carroll and his wife are relocating to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania so that Mrs. Carroll may begin her two-year residence program in pediatric dentistry. Mr. Carroll will be sitting for the Pennsylvania Bar Examination this summer and expects to be practicing law in Pennsylvania by the end of 2010.
All of us at NGS wish Brian and his wife all the best in their future endeavors, and provide our heartfelt thanks and respect to Mr. Carroll for all the tireless effort and work that he has put forth on behalf of the Firm's clients in which representation he was involved. He will be missed.
Former 'Jon & Kate' star Jon Gosselin files for primary custody of kids
.jpg)
According to TMZ, John Gosselin has formally begun his quest for primary custody of his eight children with ex-wife Kate Gosselin.
The former Jon & Kate Plus 8 patriarch filed the legal papers requesting primary physical custody on Wednesday in Berks County, PA family court, according to a copy of the documents obtained by TMZ.
In addition, Jon has also requested a judge review the current child support arrangement -- claiming an arbitrator in the couple's divorce filing "failed to take into consideration the numerous factors provided for by the law in Pennsylvania," according to the documents.
CLE: Dividing The Family Business in Divorce
Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC congratulates its partner, Victor A. Garnice, Esq., on his CLE presentation of "Dividing the Family Business in Divorce" earlier today.
Mr. Garnice, who has been a member of the bar for more than 33 years, is admitted to practice in Arizona. His main area of practice is Arizona divorce and family law. He handles trials and other complex matters.
Please feel free to contact him directly at our website or by telephone at 602.485.5800.
Recent Ruling: Default Divorce Decree
.jpg)
In Wigand v. Wigand, Wife appealed from an order vacating a default decree of dissolution. Arizona Court of Appeals, Division 1 ,however, agreed and set the Arizona divorce decree aside.
In this case, Wife filed for divorce in February 2008, and requested spousal maintenance, an equitable division of the community property and debts, and attorneys’ fees. Her petition also alleged that Husband wasted community assets during the marriage. Husband, who was living and working in New Mexico, accepted and waived service of process.
Although Husband claimed that the parties were discussing a divorce settlement, Wife filed an application and affidavit for default, and the court subsequently entered a default decree. The decree awarded Wife $2895 per month in spousal maintenance for twelve years, the community residence (which had approximately $155,000 in equity), all personal property and the vehicle in her possession, the retirement account in her name, any debts that were incurred by her or in her name, and her attorneys’ fees. Husband received the car and personal property in his possession, the retirement account in his name, and any debts that were incurred by him or in his name. Five months later, Husband sought to set aside and vacate the default decree.
Continue Reading...NGS Voted Best Arizona Divorce & Family Law Firm In The Valley!
Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist, PLC is proud to announce that it has voted the "Best of the Valley" by Arizona Foothills Magazine.
We thank all of our valued and loyal clients whose recognition of our tireless services on their behalf have made this possible. We look forward to contiuing to serve all indiviuals who are in need of Arizona Divorce & Family Law representation and will strive to lead the way in service and professionalism in all Arizona Divorce & Family Law related matters.
Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist attorneys can be contacted for initial consultations at either their Scottsdale office (602-485-5800) or Tempe office (480-961-5900).
***Recent Ruling *** Unequal Division Not Limited To Short-Term Marriages
.jpg)
Yesterday, Arizona Court of Appeals, Division 1, issued a published opinion, Flower v. Flower, wherein they dismissed the argument that an unequal division under Toth v. Toth is limited to marriages of extremely short duration.
Moreover, there is language in the opinion suggesting that length of marriage is only one factor in this analysis, and that courts need to look to overall contributions. Suffice to say, Flower might exponentially expand the scope of cases in which litigants seek an unequal division of property who would otherwise have accepted the fact that he or she had little real chance of persuading the trial court to deviate from an unequal division. We will wait to see whether the Arizona Supreme Court has something to say about it.
Recent Ruling - Undisclosed Line of Credit on Marital Residence
The Court of Appeals affirmed The Honorable Judge Hugh Hegyi's ruling in Frantz v. Frantz, 2009 WL 4981533 (Ariz.App. Div. 1), a case that dealt with an issue that is becoming more and more common in Arizona as a result of the State's heavy financial reliance of the real estate market. In Frantz, Husband appealed from a decree of dissolution arguing that the family court erred in its determination that a second lien secured by the marital residence was not a community obligation. At the dissolution hearing, Husband, Wife, and a real estate appraiser testified. Judge Hegyi stated:
“In finding that the community has $92,000 in equity in the [residence], the court does not deduct the value of the $84,000 second lien on that property. It finds that WIFE has established by clear and convincing evidence that the lien is not a community obligation. The money was received by HUSBAND alone. HUSBAND alone had the ability to explain what happened to the proceeds of the loan, and has failed to do so. After observing the parties' demeanor in testifying, the court finds HUSBAND expended these proceeds in a manner that was not intended to, and did not, benefit the community."
Husband filed a motion to alter or amend the decree requesting that the court value the residence at $8,000 - an amount reflecting the fair market value minus any and all of the liens and encumbrances obtained by the parties during the marriage. The court denied Husband's motion.
Continue Reading...IRAs, Community Property Law, Transmutation, Commingling
The Arizona Court of Appeals recently rendered a decision regarding Arizona community property law in an Arizona divorce case. A summary follows.
In Quinlan v. Quinlan, Not Reported in P.3d, 2009 WL 3644806 (Ariz.App. Div. 1), the wife appealed from a ruling from the Arizona divorce court arguing that the family court erred in determining that Husband's IRA accounts were his sole and separate property, among other things. In this case, husband and wife were married in October 1989; wife filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in October 2006, and the decree of dissolution was entered in July 2008.
Continue Reading...Arizona "No Fault" Divorce
Many people often ask what an Arizona "No Fault" Divorce really means. In simple terms, it means that in Arizona any husand or wife, despite what the other spouse may want, can get divorced without the other agreeing that the marriage should be disolved.
The Arizona divorce statute requires that there must be an "irretrievable breakdown" of the marriage for the court to be able grant a divorce, or as it is technically called, a dissolution of marriage.
If either a husband or wife by petition under oath state that the marriage is irretrievably broken or if one of them so states and the other does not deny it, the court will make a finding as to whether or not the marriage is irretrievably broken. If either the husband or wife denies under oath that the marriage is irretrievably broken, the court will conduct a hearing to consider whether reconciliation is possible and will also (1) make a finding as to whether or not the marriage is irretrievably broken, and (2) stay the divorce proceeding for not more than sixty days. At the request of either party or on its own motion, the court may also send the husband and wife a conciliation conference.
There are other possible strategic reasons why a husband or wife may want to ask for a concilliation conference other than to stay the court's determination as to whether the marriage can be reconcilled. For further information on this and other issues relating to Arizona divorce cases, contact Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC.
Continue Reading...Uncontested Divorces in Arizona
In Arizona there are many people who have never been divorced before. Often times, one married person decides that they would no longer like to be married and would like to know more about "uncontested divorces". They don't exactly know what an "uncontested divorce" is but have heard that it is an easier and relatively cheaper process. Well, that is true. However, most people believe that an Arizona uncontested divorce can only be accomplished when the other spouse's whereabouts are unknown. That is not the case. When both husband and wife have come to terms that they will be divorcing and have come to an agreement regarding the terms, i.e., division of community property, assumption of community debt, spousal maintenance (also called alimony or spousal support), and if children are involved, child custody and child support, an uncontested divorce can be used to simplify the process and get the divorce done quicker.
What actually is an "uncontested divorce" in Arizona? Well, it is a divorce automatically granted by a court when the spouse who is served with a summons and complaint for divorce fails to file a formal response with the court. Many divorces proceed this way when the spouses have worked everything out and there's no reason for both to go to court -- and pay the court costs.
For more information regarding uncontested divorces, contact Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC and they will be glad to answer any questions you may have, or assist you with the process.
Arizona Child Custody Statutes - Best Interests of the Child
When there are children involved in divorce cases in Arizona (or paternity cases), many questions arise as to how child custody is resolved. Arizona Statutes deal with child custody issues in Arizona divorce and paternity cases and are a great first place to start.
Some definitions need to be known and understood. For instance, with respect to Arizona child custody, "Joint legal custody" means the condition under which both parents share legal custody. In this situation, "both parents share legal custody and neither parent's rights are superior, except with respect to specified decisions set forth by the court or the parents in a final judgment or order." Normally, the major decisions regarding a child involve medical, education and religion. Most other decisions made by a parent such as daily activies of the child, what the children eat and wear, etc. are made by the parent who has physical custody of the child at the time the decision needs to be made.
That brings us to "Joint physical custody", which is defined as "the condition under which the physical residence of the child is shared by the parents in a manner that assures that the child has substantially equal time and contact with both parents." What "substantially equally time and contact with both parents" is, of course, where many problems may arise as both parents may have very different views on this subject.
In an Arizona divorce or paternity case, if mother and father are unable to reach an agreement as to what custody arrangements should be put in place for their child, Arizona statute authorizes the court to award when deciding child custody that custody be either "sole" or "joint". Importantly, there is no presumption in favor of one custody arrangement over the other. And, "the court in determing custody shall not prefer a parent as custodian because of that parent's sex". So, the sex of the parent when determing child custody in Arizona should not be a factor in the court's decision.
Many questions often arise about "what is in the child's best interests" in Arizona custody cases. The divorce or paternity case judge considers the following: 1. the wishes of the child's parents; 2. the wishes of the child; 3. the interaction and interrelationship of the child with the parents, the child's siblings and any others who may significantly affect the child's best interests; 4. the child's adjustment to home, school and community; 5. the mental and physical health of all individuals involved; 6. which parent is more likely to allow the child frequent and meaningful continuing contact with the other parent; 7. whether one parent, both parents or neither parent has provided primary care of the child; 8. the nature and extent of coercion or duress used by a parent in obtaining an agreement regarding custody; and 9. whether either parent was convicted of an act of false reporting of child abuse.
Of course, this is only the basics. When dealing with Arizona child custody disputes each case is different because no two situations are exactly the same. Facts always differ. If you have any questions regarding Arizona child custody in the context of an Arizona divorce or paternity case, contact Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC.
Tax Issues And Arizona Divorce
When people divorce in Arizona, there are many complex tax questions that arise. While it is impossible to address all of them without knowing the specific facts in each case, simple answers to some general questions are addressed here. First, because these issues are usually complicated, you should always talk these matters over with your divorce attorneys and CPA to get the answer for your specific situation.
Continue Reading...
Arizona Divorce Law Primer
Arizona Divorce -- No Fault Jurisdiction. According to Arizona divorce laws, you do not need to prove grounds in order to receive a divorce. The Arizona court will grant a petition for divorce on the grounds that there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. This is referred to as an Arizona no-fault divorce. Additionally, one of the spouses must have been a resident in the state of Arizona for 90 days prior to the filing of the petition for divorce in AZ.
Alimony & Community Property in Arizona. Arizona is known as a community property state, which can be defined as any asset acquired or income earned by a married person while living with his or her spouse. According to Arizona divorce laws this means that the marital property must be divided fairly or equitably and without regard to marital fault. Separate property, or property owned prior to the marriage will be retained by the owning spouse. Spousal maintenance, also known as spousal support or alimony, can be awarded to either the husband or wife. Such factors as the length of the marriage, the parties’ prior living standard, etc. are considered in determining the amount and duration that should be paid and which is considered just. Marital fault may not be taken into account in this decision.
Arizona Child Support, Child Visitation and Child Custody. The main focus in determining child custody, according to Arizona divorce law, is the best interest of the children. However, under AZ divorce laws, the parents may submit a parenting plan with the request for joint custody. Visitation rights within reason are typically awarded to the non custodial parent. Child support (a percentage of the non-custodial parents’ income paid to assist with the support of his children) is determined by the Income Shares model, based on the gross income of both parents as set forth by divorce law in Arizona. Expect to pay child support until the age of 18 or until the child is a high school graduate.
To find out more contact www.ngslaw.com.
Economic Downturn Favorable To "Monied Spouses"
While some couples are putting off divorce because they can’t afford it, the situation is different for moneyed clients. Since their assets are worth less, a lot of monied spouses believe the time is ripe to divorce because they will have to give less to the other spouse. This may be especially true where the more financially empowered spouse wants to keep the marital residence and their 401(k) and other retirement plans.
Facebook and Divorces
The following article, appearing in Time Magazine recently, relates to postings on Facebook and their relation with divorce and family law matters.
"Not long after Patrick told his wife Tammie he wanted a divorce, she posted an angry, hurt note on "the wall," or public-comments section, of his Facebook page. Embarrassed that his colleagues, clients, church friends and family could see evidence of his marital woes, he deleted it and blocked his wife from seeing his page. A couple of days later, the IT worker in Florida--who asked that his last name not be used in this story — found alarmed messages from two Facebook friends in his inbox. Tammie had used a mutual friend's account to view Patrick's wall and e-mailed several women he had had exchanges with. He says her e-mails were borderline defamatory. She says they merely noted that he was married with children, a fact he had left off his Facebook profile. Either way: Ouch."
Continue Reading...Saudi Arabia grants text-message divorce
A Jeddah court finds a Saudi Arabian man's act of divorcing his wife via text-message to be in compliance with the country's law.
The unnamed Saudi citizen, who was in Iraq when he sent the text, immediately called two men who had witnessed his marriage to inform them of his decision.
The court recognized the Saudi man's decision after making sure that the two witnesses had been duly informed, The Daily Telegraph reported.
The strict law observed in Saudi Arabia allows a man to divorce his wife by simply saying "I divorce you" three times.
Women on the other hand are permitted to take their case to court but their divorce is not guaranteed.
Judge Sides with Kelly Rutherford in Custody Issue
Star Jones Files For Divorce
NEW YORK (AP) -- Three years after tying the knot in a spectacular, over-the-top affair that caused some backlash, Star Jones has decided to end her marriage to banker Al Reynolds.
Star Jones and Al Reynolds, here in 2006, married in late 2004.
The 46-year-old TV personality quietly filed divorce papers March 26 in New York Supreme Court in Manhattan. The records are sealed, syndicated entertainment show "Entertainment Tonight" reported Wednesday.
For more information on Arizona Divorce Lawyers, contact NRG.
Continue Reading...
Ex-Wife of Former Beatle Explains Dousing of Opposing Counsel
LONDON, England (AP) -- The ex-wife of former Beatle Sir Paul McCartney said Friday that she snapped when she poured a jug of water over the head of her former husband's lawyer during their bitter divorce battle in Britain's courts.
Continue Reading...
Wife of Entertainment Mogul Simmons Files for Divorce
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Kimora Lee Simmons has already moved on, but she took steps to make it official by filing for divorce from her husband of seven years, entertainment mogul Russell Simmons.
For information on Arizona divorce law, see NRG Family Law.
Continue Reading...
Interesting Article For Military Personnel
The following is an article by Mark Sullivan, who is an expert on Military Issues in Family Law.
Mark Sullivan, is a retired Army Reserve JAG colonel who practices with Sullivan & Grace, P.A. in Raleigh, NC. A board-certified specialist in family law and past president of the North Carolina Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, he is chairman of the ABA Section of Family Law Military Committee. Mr. Sullivan is also the author of the Section's soon-to-be published, The Military Divorce Handbook, which will be available for distribution this Spring.
For Arizona military divorce issues, contact NRG.
Haven't Gotten Around to Changing Those Beneficiary Designations? A Word of Caution
Could life insurance or pension benefits meant for you go to a spouse from a previous marriage instead? A recent U. S. Supreme Court ruling (Egelhoff v. Egelhoff) makes this a potential cause for concern.
Continue Reading...Employee Who Kept Spouse Enrolled in Health Plan Five Years After Divorce Found Liable for Fraud
Under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reform Act of 1986 (COBRA), health insurance coverage provided by an employer can be continued for up to 36 months by an ex-spouse. Technically, this law applies only to employers with 20 or more employees. However, most states have laws that apply COBRA-type benefits to employees of smaller companies.
Continue Reading...Preparation of Pendente Lite Applications
The following article is a must read for anyone preparing to ask the court in a divorce action to issue temporary orders pending a final resolution of all issues at trial.
By Curtis J. Romanowski
Part One of a Two-Part Series.
The pendente lite phase of a case and the results of a pendente lite application are critical for setting the tone for the balance of the case, and often affect whatever final decisions or agreements are reached. An inequitable result could seriously compromise one party's case. Typically, pendente lite motions provide judges with an introduction to the parties, including the details of the marriage, separation, children and other relevant factors surrounding the case. As a rule, first impressions are usually important, and the pendente lite application is no exception.
Depending on the results, pendente lite applications have the potential to create leverage for the balance of the case, spur client management and relational problems, and escalate litigation costs attributable to the entrenchment of the "winner" and the commitment of the "loser" to retake lost ground.
It is, therefore, essential to provide judges with sound, hard evidence at the pendente lite phase, that will enable them to deal fairly with both sides pending the submission of final proofs. An unfairly skewed pendente lite award can thwart fair outcomes and is simply one of the worst things that can happen to both parties. What about voluntary arrangements? Money being paid or received voluntarily might quickly become the status quo. Consequently, if the arrangement is unacceptable to either party, a pendente lite support application should be filed to establish a more appropriate support amount.
Continue Reading...Forbes Article -- Top Financial Divorce Mistakes
Leah Hoffmann's article in Forbes magazine is a good read for anyone considering going through the divorce process, or even better, for anyone currently involved in the process.
In essence, she tells everyone that "getting a divorce is a messy business, both personally and financially". Her advice -- "don't be in such a hurry to reach a settlement that you make these costly financial mistakes". Click here for the full article.
Florida Divorce Raises Issues of Authority, Costs
Itir Yakar
Daily Business Review
02-22-2005
A Broward County, Fla., judge did not improperly delegate his decision-making authority on attorney fees in a hotly contested divorce case, because he gave oral instructions before the parties drafted their proposals and because his decision incorporated elements from both sides, Florida's 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled.
In its unanimous ruling last month, the 4th DCA distinguished the case of Rosenbloom v. Rosenbloom from that of Perlow v. Berg-Perlow. In Perlow, the Florida Supreme Court last year chastised a Palm Beach Circuit senior judge for letting the lawyer for one of the parties in a divorce case write the judge's order.
Continue Reading...Privacy On Assets In Divorce Case Challenged In Court
In Arizona, all records regarding a divorce action are public record. This is not necessarily the case in other states. For example, in New York only the parties and their attorneys of record are allowed access to the file.
For obvious reasons, Arizona's policy raises concerns for litigants going through the process of divorce. The following article addresses California's approach.
Continue Reading...Rush Limbaugh Divorce Finalized
Rush Limbaugh's divorce has been "signed and sealed" in a Florida courthouse, the Palm Beach Daily News reports.
The popular radio host returns to bachelor status after ending his marriage with his third wife, Marta.
Continue Reading...Alimony Payments Have Tax Implications
By IRS Newswire
Feb 15, 2005
From the IRS, here is Tax Tip 2005-32.
When the end of matrimony leads to the start of alimony, how does it affect your taxes? Alimony payments you receive are taxable to you in the year received, according to the Internal Revenue Service.
The amount is reported on line 11 of Form 1040. You cannot use Form 1040A or Form 1040EZ. The person making the payment may claim a deduction in the year paid on Form 1040. You must give the person who paid the alimony your Social Security number or you may have to pay a $50 penalty.
If your decree or agreement calls for both alimony and child support and specifies amounts for each, only the alimony is taxable. Because no taxes are withheld from alimony payments, you may need to make estimated tax payments or increase the amount withheld from your paycheck.
For more information, see Publication 504, Divorced or Separated Individuals, Tax Topics 406, Alimony Received, and 452, Alimony Paid. Publications and forms may be downloaded or ordered by calling toll free 1-800-TAX-FORM (1-800-829-3676).
Helpful Links:
Publication 504, Divorced or Separated Individuals (PDF 171K)
Tax Topic 406, Alimony Received
Tax Topic 452, Alimony Paid
Spyware Evidence Not Permitted In Divorce Case
A Florida appeals court has refused to allow a woman to use evidence obtained by illegally planting spyware on her husband's computer to support her case in their bitter divorce proceedings.
Beverley Ann O'Brian installed a surveillance program called Spector on the computer used by her husband James. She obtained transcripts of private on-line chats between James and another woman with whom he was playing Yahoo Dominoes, according to court papers.
The Circuit Court for Orange County, Florida, found that evidence obtained in this way could not be used in court because it had been intercepted - an offence under federal wiretapping regulations and the Florida Security of Communications Act 2003. It banned Mrs O'Brian from using spyware in the future and from disclosing any information obtained from the surveillance.
Mrs. O'Brian appealed, arguing that the evidence should have been admissible, as it had been obtained by copying information stored on the computer, and not through the interception of electronic communications.
Continue Reading...Employers May Now Charge for QDRO Approval
In a little noticed change, the US Department of Labor issued a "field assistance bulletin" in May, 2003, that permits employers and administrators of ERISA-regulated defined contribution retirement plans (such as 401(k) plans) to charge QDRO processing expenses. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that one large plan administrator (Fidelity Investments) now charges for QDROs for 40 of its 200 plans for which Fidelity processes QDRO documents. The decision to charge is made by each individual employer.
Continue Reading...DR Rules Committee to Submit Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure to AJC in March 2005
The Committee on the Rules of Procedure in Domestic Relations Cases is nearing completion of the first draft of the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure (ARFLP) and plans to submit a report of its findings and recommendations and the rules for approval to the Committee on Superior Courts (COSC) in February, 2005 and the Arizona Judicial Council (AJC) in March, 2005. If the Rules are approved by AJC, the Committee will submit the Rules for approval during the Justices' Rules Agenda in June, 2005 and circulate them for public comment until August, 2005. The DR Rules Committee is hopeful to have the ARFLP effective on January 1, 2006.
Continue Reading...Post-Decree Bankruptcy Basis To Set Aside Decree
This case has great implications to those spouses out their who think that they can beat the divorce court by taking all of the debt in a divorce action and then run over to the bankruptcy court and have it discharged.
In Birt v. Birt, the Husband's filing of a Chapter 7 Bankrutpcy approximately two months after the entry of the parties Decree of Dissolution resulting in Wife being obligated to pay all community debt and remaining liable for property equalization payments to Husband, created "such a substantial injustice that it overrides the committment to finality of judgments and on the factsof this case call for relief under Rule 60(c)(6).".
The trial court on remand, was directed to determine: (1) Whether to affirm an award of attorney's fees and clarify whether it is in the nature of nondischargeable maintenance or support rather than part of a property division; (2) Whether the bankruptcy discharge resulting in the doubling of Wife's ultimate liability on community debts requires an award of spousal maintenance to Wife; (3) Whether the discharged creditors have reached any agreements with Wife to limit the Wife's obligation on the debts; (4) Whether to reallocate property, debts or equalization payments; and (5) Whether the original allocations were in the nature of spousal maintenance or child support rather than a simple division of property and debt.
Invalid Mexican Marriage Recognized in Arizona
A marriage that is invalid under the law where the ceremony occurred may nevertheless be recognized as valid in Arizona if it would have been valid had the ceremony been performed there, the Arizona Court of Appeals decided in Donlann v. Macgurn, Ariz. Ct. App., No. 1 CA-CV 01-0095, 9/12/02).
The parties participated in a marriage ceremony in 1990 during a vacation in Puerto Vallerta, Jalisco, Mexico. They obtained the necessary blood tests and marriage certificate in Mexico. Their marriage certificate was signed by a civil registry official; however, the marriage ceremony was performed by a woman who was not an authorized member of the civil registry office.
The couple returned to Arizona and resided together after the wedding. When the wife petitioned for divorce in 1997, the husband claimed that their marriage was invalid under Jalisco law because the wedding was not performed by a civil registry official. The trial court agreed and the wife appealed.
Continue Reading...Contact Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist, PLC
Scottsdale/Paradise Valley Office
Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist, PLC
Paradise Valley Corporate Center
4835 East Cactus Road, Suite 220
Scottsdale, Arizona 85254
Telephone: 602.485.5800
Facsimile: 602.485.0600
Website: www.ngslaw.com
Email: info@ngslaw.com
Chandler/Tempe Office
Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist, PLC
One Agave Center
8950 South 52nd Street, Suite 212
Tempe, Arizona 85284
Telephone: 480.691.5900
Facsimile: 480.691.7013
Website: www.ngslaw.com
Email: info@ngslaw.com
About Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist, PLC
Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC is an Arizona divorce and family law firm. Our hard-earned and highly respected reputation is built on years of practicing at the highest level of skill, compassion, integrity and versatility. Our partners and associate attorneys represent clients in diverse matters from divorce and child custody disputes to complex business litigation in the context of a divorce case to mediation or litigation and all associated facets of law.
With an intensely guarded reputation of excellence and track record of success Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC has earned the respect and admiration of colleagues and opposing counsel alike. This prestige and standing in the legal community has positioned our firm to attract the brightest legal talent to best server our client's needs.
OUR PHILOSOPHY
We believe our clients are best served by a progressive "team representation" approach that emphasizes creative use of intellectual, persuasive and technical acumen. Depth and diversity in our attorney talent allow us to match your needs with the most skilled individual representation while also providing the benefits of the entire teams collective capabilities.
To ensure the most successful resolution for each client, Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist PLC collaborates closely with other professionals - including family therapists, counselors, corporate and financial advisors and clergy. This inclusive extension of our comprehensive team approach supports unique strategies that better meet each client's unique needs.
OUR COMMITTMENT
Your cause is our commitment. Every Nirenstein Garnice Soderquist LLP attorney is dedicated to tireless advocacy, reasoned decision-making and effective implementation of superior strategy and sophisticated techniques.
Every effort is made to achieve a successful resolution outside the courtroom. However, our attorneys will confidently step before the Bench to challenge opposing counsel - and judges - when doing so is in your best interest. In every circumstance we will passionately champion your rights.
Part of our role is to cut through the jargon, answer questions and clarify complex issues. We provide thoughtful counsel that allows you to make decisions with confidence while actively participating in the resolution of your case. We devote maximum effort to achieve maximum results while always striving to deliver in an optimum, timely, cost-efficient and practical manner.
OUR VALUES
We realize our clients have come to us to assist them in resolving delicate matters. That's why every case - every issue - is addressed with understanding and sensitivity.
We never forget that our clients are people who deserve dignity, respect and compassion.
We're mindful that those on the opposite side of the negotiating table - or the courtroom - may often be friends or family whom you never imagined you'd be speaking to through an attorney.
We respect the bonds of family and understand that disputes between siblings, parents and children, in-laws or other relatives require firm resolve tempered by delicate diplomacy if there is to be hope of maintaining or repairing familial harmony.
We understand that clients with children can never lose sight of the need to maintain their ability to collaborate with the other parent - now and throughout their lives.
We believe a strategic understanding of the law leads to new possibilities and innovative ways of helping clients minimize risk while maximizing progress toward their goals.
We believe each and every client has the justified expectation of our fullest commitment and resolve focused on achieving the broadest positive outcome on their behalf.
Please visit our website to find out more.
