San Diego Divorce Attorney Blog

Reporter Jill Serjeant reports in this published article that Kelsey Grammer's request to be single by the end of this month is opposed. This article raises the question as to how can you get a divorce when you are only in the middle of your divorce proceeding.

The legal procedure is called Bifurcation. As a San Diego Certified Family Law Specialist (Board of Legal Specialization, State Bar of California), I have filed bifurcation motions and opposed bifurcation motions. I think that Camille Grammer has a chance to block Kelsey's attempt to be single by the end of January. But let's go back to the basics:

"Bifurcation" means to divide. In California Family Law it is a court procedure in a family law case whereby the judge separates out one issue from all of the rest and the court generally approves a bifurcation request for two typical reasons. First, that a party to the divorce is getting remarried. And, second, that there is one issue in the case that, if separated from the remainder of the case, and resolved, would assist in the resolution of the remainder of the issues. All bifurcation requests require that the divorce case has satisfied the six month waiting period that is mandated by California law.

In Mr. Grammer's case, Mr. Grammer filed a motion for bifurcation requesting that the court separate out the issue of terminating the marriage so that he will be single and free to marry his woman friend, Kayte Walsh. The Grammers were married for thirteen years however the divorce was filed and served more than six months ago and Kelsey argues that he is entitled under California law to the bifurcation of the marital status. Nearly 100 times out of 100 such requests would be granted in a California divorce court. However Camille Grammer has filed a response in opposition to this motion. I've read the response (you can see it here), and it appears to me that she has done an excellent job in raising significant reasons why the bifurcation should not be granted at this time. Why do I say this?

Continue reading "California Divorce and Bifurcation" »

Divorces in the State of California consist of many different types: Short Term Marriages (marriages of less than ten years); Long Term Marriages (marriages of ten years or more); high income marriages; marriages with a significant community property estate; as well as marriages with or without children; and this is only a short list to describe how individual marital circumstances can be.

The Huffington Post recently published an article written by journalist and tax attorney Julian Block describing the use of a powerful tool to look for income and assets--the tax return. As a San Diego Certified Family Law Specialist I work with tax returns and, in more involved cases, forensic witnesses, expert witnesses, CPAs and private investigators. It has been my experience that there are spouses who don't want any such help by virtue of a firm belief that both spouses have been completely honest about the disclosure of all marital income and property. However, the reasons that have led a spouse to a divorce often involve beliefs of betrayal and dishonesty. The investigation for hidden assets and income may or may not be successful. Dishonest people are either good or bad at dishonesty.

"Discovery" in a legal proceeding is a significantly large and complex legal topic describing how a spouse may demand and access information, data and documents pertaining to the case. Simply put, this process involves Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Inspection Demands, Depositions and Subpoenas. Mr. Block's article informs that the simple tax return may be the best starting point for the discovery effort. Schedule B contains information as to mutual funds, dividends, interests and financial institutions. Schedule D contains information as to the sale of certain types of assets and this information may lead to additional information as to income or hidden assets.

Continue reading "California Divorce Report: Discovery of Income and Assets" »

This blog will refer to In Re Marriage of Tharp and the decision of the Court of Appeals of California, Fifth District regarding the appeal filed by the Wife (Mary Beth) which was granted on several points in a decision certified for publication. A published version of this decision may be found here. This is a decision that is must reading for California Certified Family Law Specialist attorneys and students of California Family Law as it provides a model as to how family law cases should be handled at the trial level.

The decision publication that I reviewed was 41 pages. This posting will discuss an isolated issue and hopefully future posting will describe other important points raised in the Appellate case. Briefly, the parties were married for more than ten years ("long term marriage"); they have three minor children; the Husband is a self employed businessman with substantial earnings (not fully described in the decision but reportedly over $100,000 or $150,000 and possibly much more).

The Wife immediately, upon the filing of the divorce petition by Husband, initiated discovery requests requiring Husband to supply documents and information as to income, expenses, property and debt. Wife also filed a request for attorney's fees as she had little or no income and Husband was in control of the marital income. When Husband did not respond to the discovery requests, Wife filed motions to compel discovery by the Husband and repeated her requests for attorney's fees. The trial court initially granted some of Wife's discovery motions; however the award for fees was quite small--in an amount that later was referred to by Wife's attorney as inadequate to allow Wife the same legal representation as Husband enjoyed.

Continue reading "California Divorce Appeal Granted" »

As a La Jolla divorce attorney, I have seen many Petitions for divorce (dissolution of marriage) in the San Diego Superior Court. Many simply glance at the petition document assuming that the document only contains superficial information. I don't agree. This blog will examine the petition for divorce by Patricia Arquette wherein Patricia Arquette is the Petitioner and Thomas Jane is the Respondent.

Brief background: Patricia Arquette was born in 1968 and is 42 years old. She was raised in an actor centric family; commenced her acting career in 1986 and has appeared in many Hollywood movies. She was married to Nicolas Cage for 6 years and has been married to Thomas Jane since 2006.

On August 13, 2010 Patricia Arquette filed for divorce in the Central District Los Angeles Court. She lists one child, age 7. (This blog does not provide names of children.) The child was born three years prior to the marriage. Therefore there is a potential "Marvin" case which the attorneys will consider. (Michelle Marvin sued actor Lee Marvin to establish her common law marital rights as she and Lee were never married.)

She lists some separate property (for example, "jewelry") but states that there are other items which are "not presently known". As to community property Patricia Arquette states that there are such items however they are also "unknown". Some attorneys seek to extensively list all separate property and all community property however I don't see the value of doing this in the Petition. Possibly the "unknown" statement could be attacked as disingenuous. I like to simply state that the items will be listed in the mandatory Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure. The Declaration of Disclosure is mandatory in divorce cases and lists property, debt, income and expenses.

Continue reading "Arquette California Divorce Petition Analysis" »