Tag Archive for: child custody

Rise in disputes over pet ownership in divorces

Wisconsin residents may be interested in an article discussing the rise in a certain type of custody battle during divorces. Attorneys are noticing that couples are fighting over who gets to keep the pets more and more.

In a recent survey of family law attorneys, 27 percent stated that they have seen an increase in the number of couples who are battling over ownership of pets during a divorce. Under the law, courts regard a pet as an item of personal property. In that way, pets are no different than other pieces of property, such as furniture and jewelry. Most often it is a dog that is at issue in the split, comprising 88 percent of animal disputes. The second most frequent animals fought over in divorces are cats, at merely five percent, followed by horses and “other.”

In some cases, ownership of the pet is used as a hardball negotiating tactic during divorce proceedings. Due to the emotional attachment that many owners have to their pets, this makes dealing with pet custody more akin to child custody than property ownership. Upkeep costs are also similar, as pets often have expenses associated with their care. As with child custody issues, it is probably best for couples to deal with who retains ownership of the pet on their own, rather than leaving it up to a judge.

Even though courts are becoming more accepting of pets as assets in property division during divorce, it can be helpful to negotiate an agreement regarding future ownership outside of a judge’s chambers. An attorney who is experienced in a property division issues may be helpful in negotiating a fair custody agreement for pets and other marital assets.

Source: Mainstreet, “Pet Custody Battles on the Rise in Divorce Court”, Juliette Fairley , February 21, 2014

Political power couple, art collectors’ divorce not so amicable

Wisconsin art aficionados may be familiar with the art-collecting Washington power couple Tony and Heather Podesta, if not for their valuable holdings then perhaps for their lobbying activities. It seems that the couple’s divorce, part of a split announced in 2013 and characterized as amicable, may not be as friendly as they had originally portrayed.

Tony Podesta filed for marital dissolution in April 2014, accusing Heather Podesta of misleading him about their chances for reconciliation when he provided half the down payment on her new mansion in March 2013. At the same time, he says, she had already started a new relationship unbeknownst to him. In addition, he claims that his wife had contacted prestigious museums requesting that they block him from donating art to them. She is also accused of changing the locks on their shared Italian apartment to keep her husband out. The filing claims that Heather Podesta had sought to harass and embarrass her husband in an effort to gain financial leverage over him.

The Podestas were a major power inside the Washington Beltway during the presidency of Bill Clinton. Tony Podesta’s brother was chief of staff for the White House and later served as a counselor to President Barack Obama. Heather Podesta was formerly a Capitol Hill staffer and started her own lobbying firm in 2007.

Power couples may face as many emotional challenges as those less influential when it comes to filing for divorce. Property division, child custody and spousal support are contentious legal issues that many face during the marital dissolution process. However, divorce attorneys can provide guidance so that their clients can keep control of the assets that really matter to them.

Source: The Washington Post, “Tony Podesta divorce filing: wife Heather Podesta tried to ‘embarrass and harass’“, Emily Heil, April 03, 2014

Pets a new bargaining chip in divorce

Children are not the only possible bargaining chip in a Wisconsin divorce. Sometimes, pets also become a pawn in the game of deciding who keeps what assets after a couple dissolves their marriage.

After all, most people become emotionally attached to their dogs, cats or other animal companions. In fact, a soon-to-be ex-husband or ex-wife might use the pet as a tool for extortion. For instance, he or she might try to fight for a furry friend they may not even want. Sometimes, they do this just so a spouse gives up some other valuable item, but how does this happen?

Well, spouses often negotiate possession of pets the same way they discuss ownership of a table, chairs, sofas, beds, coins or other objects. After all, the law usually considers animals pieces of personal property. Unlike in child custody cases, where the law requires that the best interests of the child be considered, the best interests of the pet may be ignored.

In most cases, the court probably would rule in favor of the original pet owner. However, the person who takes care of the animal and brings it to the vet for checkups might have some say in the matter. Otherwise, placement of the pet might depend on where the kids will live.

Another factor to consider is lifestyle. For instance, a person who travels all the time for business may have time for a dog, cat or other pet. Likewise, anyone who frequently reports to work on a moment’s notice might also not have the time to feed, groom or wash an animal. Therefore, the court may rule in favor of another person who stays home and has a more predictable work schedule.

Source: Forbes, “How Are Pets Handled In Divorce?“, Jeff Landers, April 17, 2014

Divorce and division of property

Wisconsin residents may be familiar with a major aspect of divorce, the division of real estate. Numerous scenarios can present themselves when a divorce occurs. If a spouse wants to stay in the house and the vacating spouse wants the initial down payment returned, the property can be refinanced to come up with the money. If a house was purchased with a down payment of $100,000 and if only $60,000 can be raised to buy out the spouse because of a decrease in property value, one option is to make up the difference with gift funds, coming from family in most instances.

If a spouse is attempting to buy a house, and the spouse and ex are still legally married, a spouse can release interest in the transaction by signing a quit claim deed. As in most conflicts, keeping the lines of communication open between spouses means that amicable settlements are more likely to ensue.

It is important to monitor credit reports and make sure that debts fairly represent what is owed by each spouse. When there is much acrimony in a divorce, it may be advisable to consult an attorney. A divorce settlement has a long-term effect on a relationship and family, and even extended family, so in most cases, it is best to secure representation.

There is more to divorce than the division of property, and each divorce is unique. Rather than risk a fair and equitable settlement, a family law attorney can assess each element of the case and provide guidance. When there are alimony and child custody concerns, many assets, out of state property and pension plans, an attorney can assist a client to obtain the best settlement terms.

Source: Credit.com, “How to Divide Your House in a Divorce“, Scott Sheldon, July 09, 2014

Ironing out tax deductions in a divorce agreement

As divorcing Wisconsin parents may know, making sure children feel secure and maintain a relationship with both parents is an important consideration. Sometimes, parents forget they will once again be paying taxes as a person who is single. Deciding which parent takes deductions for the dependent children may be decided before the divorce decree is finalized. Becoming acquainted with what the deductions are is important.

Child custody usually places the child in one household with visitation, or the parents may share physical custody equally. If one parent holds primary custody, that parent is the head of the household. However, it is possible for the custodial parent to allow the non-custodial parent to claim a child for tax purposes, and a waiver is used to accomplish this. In the latter case, the child’s time may be divided equally for six months with each parent. Parents cannot each share head of the household status for the purpose of dependent child tax deductions.

Deciding which parent claims a child as a tax dependent may set the stage for additional deductions. This may be worked out in the divorce agreement. Some parents alternate years by taking the $3,950 deduction per child or work out another plan. The IRS has its own requirements for claiming a dependent, and checking with an accountant may be a good idea.

Other credits are now possible. A single parent who earns up to $75,000 in adjusted gross income may take a $1,000 tax deduction per dependent child. If the parent uses childcare, he or she may deduct a certain amount.

An attorney may offer guidance concerning tax issues while a divorce agreement is being negotiated. An attorney might help by planning for future financial considerations such as tax deductions for dependents and making it part of the divorce arrangement.

Keeping the costs of a divorce down

Divorce can be an expensive endeavor for many Wisconsin couples whose marriages are ending, but there are ways to keep the costs under control. While individuals often do not have much control over their attorney’s average hourly rates, they can control how much work they ask the attorney to do. Keeping the billable hours down will result in a more affordable divorce. The key is learning what to have the lawyer handle and when to let things go.

One of the biggest mistakes made by individuals is getting caught up in the tiny details and trying to micromanage the parenting decisions made by the ex-spouse. Arguing over minor details like exact soccer time practices will only lead to a higher divorce bill. When a couple is able to come to agreements on these minor details on their own, then the overall cost will fall.

As individuals treat other with honesty and fairness, the amount of items that must be discussed in court and reviewed by attorneys decreases. In one reported case, a man’s attempt to avoid paying his wife spousal support resulted in roughly $300,000 in legal fees, and the wife was still eventually granted alimony. Agreeing to spousal support from the outset could have saved the man a great deal of time and money.

When dealing with such matters as property division, child custody and support arrangements, an attorney can help a client in negotiating an agreement with which both parties are in accord. Legal counsel can provide valuable guidance throughout the process and help clients avoid mistakes. The clients can in turn keep costs down by being more flexible and reasonable when working through the divorce process.

Source: CNBC, “How to get divorced without breaking the bank”, Susan Caminiti, Feb. 9, 2015

Pet custody issues in a divorce

For many Wisconsin couples, pets are part of the family. When a divorce happens, the couple may see the pets as family members that should be subject to custody agreements. However, the law sees pets as property rather than as members of the family, like children. Therefore, different rules apply to pet ownership after divorce than are used to determine child custody.

The determination of the post-divorce ownership of a couple’s pets is normally seen by courts as part of the property division process. In most cases, a court will only award pets to one spouse or another. Having the pets travel weekly from one home to another, as children often do under custody agreements, is not usually an option. Instead, the court will have to decide, in the absence of an agreement, which partner retains ownership of the pet.

Before the court makes this decision, the judge will consider the circumstances in which the pet came to be owned by the couple. This can be important if one of the spouses owned the pet prior to the marriage, as state laws usually provide that any property belonging to one spouse before the marriage is considered to be separately owned and therefore not subject to division.

While most judges will adhere to the property division approach when dealing with pet ownership, courts in some jurisdictions have begun to consider the best interests of the pet and the wishes of the owners in making a decision on these matters. For those who are facing these and other divorce legal issues, the advice of a family law attorney is often valuable.

Tumbling Marriage Rates in Wisconsin Raise Family Law Questions

The United State Census Bureau released its statistics on marriage this week. The numbers tell an interesting story. In the 1960s, more than 80 percent of American adults were married. By 2000, the number fell to 57 percent. The recent figure for 2009 is 52 percent nationwide and 53 percent for Wisconsin. In Milwaukee County, only 41 percent of adults were married as of 2009.

The reasons for the decline are unclear. Some would argue that it is a sign of deteriorating family values. Others point out that young adults are waiting longer to get married than previous generations. Still others maintain that women no longer see marriage as a requirement for economic reasons. While the cause for the drop in marriage rates is up for debate, the effects are fairly predictable when it comes to family law.

With fewer marriages there will be less formal arrangements between couples. Many couples are choosing to live together or cohabitate.  According to the Population Reference Bureau, the decline in marriage rates “has been accompanied by a rapid increase in the number of cohabitating couples.”

When cohabitating couples break up, they do not divorce. Divorce allows married couples to divide their property, arrange for alimony (maintenance), child custody, visitation and child support. But many cohabitating couples have children and this often raises the issue of paternity, child custody, and child support.

When unmarried couples who have children separate, these issues are often left hanging and they require a court order for final resolution. The process can be complex and confusing. It is important to be fully aware of your rights and responsibilities when it comes to your children.  An experienced family law attorney can help you understand your options, rights, and responsibilities.

Source: MilwaukeeNewsBuzz.com: Is Wisconsin losing its taste for wedlock?; Matt Hrodey, 9/30/2010

Evolution in the Law of Child Custody: Part One

The law and family law in particular has a tendency of moving and evolving at glacial pace. But, much like a glacier’s movement has major consequences to the landscape around it; movements in the law can have tremendously important effects on everything around it. There is now a movement in the law to broaden the concept of parenting, and who can be considered a parent.

Recently, Drake Bennet wrote an interesting article in the Boston Globe on the notion of child custody in non-traditional families. With 21st century technology in assisted reproduction and increased acceptance of same-sex couples, many families do not resemble the family that the legal system has in mind. Today, many children are brought up with parent-like relationships with three or more adults.

Our legal system recognizes that a child can be in the custody of one or two people, but no more than that. This presumption exists because a child cannot have more than two biological parents. However, families can often be structured differently, with more than two adults having a parent-like relationship with a child. The law is often slow to adjust to changes in society, and new family arrangements can often seem out of step with the way family law judges deal with child custody issues. Changes in the way the law deals with families and children may come slowly, but such changes have happened in the past and have had dramatic consequences.

In the next part of this article, we will go into more detail about how the law of parentage has evolved in the past and where it may be heading.

Source: Boston Globe (Boston.com): Johnny has two mommies – and four dads; Drake Bennett, 10/24/2010.

Evolution in the Law of Child Custody: Part Two

Some of biggest changes in family law over the last 200 years have dealt with children born to unmarried people. American family law is derived from English common law. According to Nancy Poikoff, a family-law professor at American University, children born out of wedlock before the 19th century had no parents under the law. Children born out of wedlock had very little rights and parents of such children owed very little responsibility to them. In the 19th century, the law changed and mothers were automatically assigned parentage of children. If she were unmarried, she would be considered the sole parent. If she were married, her husband would also be considered the legal father (whether he was the biological father or not.)

In the 20th century, we saw the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate children eroded. In the 1960s and 1970s, the United State Supreme Court struck down state laws that penalized children born out of wedlock.

We are now seeing some movement in the law towards recognizing more than two adults as parents of a child. We saw two such cases in 2007. In Canada, a country that also has its laws derived from English common law, the Ontario Court of Appeals divided parental rights between a sperm donor and both members of a lesbian couple. In Pennsylvania, a trial court similarly awarded custody to a sperm donor and a both members of a same sex couple.

Right now, we are on the front end of a trend in family law. Change is happening gradually, but could have major effects on the way courts deal with parental rights. Family relationships can be complex and the breakup of a family can be a traumatic experience. Parental rights and child custody issues tend to be complex, and the courts are still coming to grips as to how to deal with non-traditional families. If you have questions regarding child custody and parents’ rights issues, an experienced family law attorney can help you find answers.

Source: Boston Globe (Boston.com): Johnny has two mommies – and four dads; Drake Bennett, 10/24/2010.