Orange County Divorce Lawyer Blog

There have been two noteworthy developments in the last few days in the divorce proceedings of Kelsey Grammer and his wife, Camille Donatacci. According to Canada's CTV News, the long-time star of Fraiser and his third wife, now a reality-TV star in her own right, have reached an impasse over the terms of their California divorce settlement.

The network reports that Camille "reportedly rejected a $30 million divorce settlement" on the grounds that it offers neither child support nor alimony. According to numerous media reports over the last few months, the couple do not have a pre-nuptial agreement. That being the case, CTV reports that Donatacci believes she is due approximately $50 million on the basis of her 14 -year-marriage to Grammer and her status as a partner in his TV production company.

In the wake of this development, celebrity-watching website TMZ reports that Grammer is now seeking to speed up the divorce process by asking a California family court judge to bifurcate the couple's Southern California divorce. Under California law, bifurcation is a procedure by which the legal dissolution of a marriage is legally split off from the financial issues raised by the divorce. This was what happened recently in the long-running divorce case of Los Angeles Dodgers owner Frank McCourt and his wife Jamie. Thanks to a recent Los Angeles family court ruling they are now no longer married, though many (arguably, most) of the financial issues arising from the end of the McCourts' marriage remain unresolved.

From Grammer's point of view, bifurcation would allow him to move ahead with marriage to his current girlfriend, Kayte Walsh. The downside of it, from Camille's perspective, could be that granting Kelsey's request to dissolve the marriage could remove much of the incentive he currently has to reach a final settlement agreement.

These are the sort of considerations that a skilled and detail-oriented Orange County divorce lawyer can help clients identify as both legal procedures and settlement negotiations move forward. As I have often said, each case is unique. The role of an Orange County divorce lawyer is to help you consider issues such as bifurcation in the context of your personal financial, emotional and marital circumstances.

TMZ: Kelsey Grammer wants quickie divorce to remarry

CTV News: Kelsey Grammer's divorce settlement offer rejected

Two months after the news broke that Miley Cyrus' parents, Billy Ray and Tish, are seeking a divorce after 17 years of marriage, celebrity websites are now reporting that the family's Toluca Lake home has been put up for sale. According to Canada's CTV News the family mansion is on the market and "Tish has reportedly been spotted looking for homes in Encino and is believed to be downsizing to a $4.6 million pad."

As I noted in a post last month, Billy Ray and Tish filed for divorce in Tennessee (where Billy Ray is originally from) citing "irreconcilable differences." Questions remain regarding how, exactly, the couple can get divorced in Tennessee granted that they rather obviously live in California. Also remaining to be seen is how this residency question may effect the eventual division of the couple's California assets.

Regardless of whether this case moves forward in Tennessee or becomes a Southern California divorce, however, one potential California child custody question has now resolved itself: in the weeks since the divorce petitions were filed Miley, the family's main breadwinner, turned 18 (custody of two younger children remains to be determined).

The Cyrus divorce case is a good reminder for the rest of us of the importance of careful planning when embarking on a Los Angeles or Orange County divorce. Residency questions can become difficult, particularly for high-net-worth couples who may own homes in multiple jurisdictions. Changing your legal residence for divorce purposes may not be as easy as some people believe (these things vary widely from state to state) and even a successful effort to move a case out of Orange County or some other Southern California venue does not necessarily mean that California's community property laws will not become a factor in settlement negotiations as they move forward.

All of these are matters in which the advice of a skilled Orange County divorce attorney can be crucial - possibly meaning the difference between a settlement that protects all of your rights and a more lopsided agreement.

CTV News: Miley Cyrus' parents put house up for sale

December appears to have been an unusually active month for celebrity California divorce filings here in the Los Angeles and Orange County area. The latest high profile couple to announce they are headed to Southern California divorce court are Dylan Walsh and Joanna Going.

Walsh, perhaps best known for his starring role as a plastic surgeon on the TV series "Nip/Tuck" has been married to Going for just over six years, according to the Los Angeles Times. The newspaper also reports that Walsh is seeking joint legal and physical custody of the couple's seven-year-old daughter. He also has two older children from his a previous marriage.

The LA Times reports that Walsh "expects to be paying spousal support" to Going, but neither the newspaper nor a number of celebrity-watching websites mention whether the couple have a signed California prenuptial agreement in place.

Situations like the one Walsh appears to be heading into can be especially awkward both financially and legally and often require especially careful and experienced assistance from a Los Angeles or Orange County divorce lawyer. Paying spousal and child support to two ex-spouses can be very difficult, even for a person with a high net value and excellent earning potential.

For a person in Walsh's position two things are especially important: seeing that his children are properly cared while, at the same time, ensuring that his own financial future is reasonably secure. These can be difficult and complicated tasks under the best of circumstances, but are more easily accomplished with skilled legal advice.

Los Angeles Times: Nip/Tuck star Dylan Walsh files for divorce from Joanna Going

ContactMusic: Dylan Walsh Files for Divorce from Joanna Going

If you did not already know, the point guard for the Phoenix Suns' Steve Nash reportedly asked his wife for a divorce the day after the birth of their son. They had been married for five years. Nash filed his divorce papers last week. Further, Nash "is asking the court to uphold a premarital agreement that calls for him to not provide permanent spousal support." In fact, Nash has made around $100 million in his career.

From an Orange County divorce lawyer's perspective and if this case was filed in California, for that matter, since the couple was married for only 5 years, it is likely that Nash's wife will only be entitled to spousal support for one half of the length of the marriage, unless the prenuptual agreement calls for a different payout. The marriage is a short-term marriage and Nash's wife will likely not be entitled to lifetime spousal support.

For high earning sports figures like Nash, he was definitely smart to have his wife sign a prenuptual agreement. Prenuptual agreements set forth a plan for the division of marital assets and debts in the event of a divorce. It is definitely something people should consider if they are entering the marriage will a lot of assets. In fact, we have discussed the purpose of entering into prenuptual agreements on this blog here.

A few things to keep in mind when entering into a prenuptual agreement are these two key factors: (1) the party who the prenuptual agreement is being enforced against must have 7 calendar days upon presentation of the final agreement in which to review same and (2) the party who the prenuptual agreement is being enforced against must have independent counsel to review same.

For more information on prenuptual agreements and how an Orange County divorce lawyer can assist you with same, contact an Orange County divorce lawyer for more information.

Source: Steve Nash's Curious Divorce Papers

New Jersey Office of Child Support Services along with New Jersey law enforcement officers successfully recouped $233,000 in child support from noncustodial parents who have been delinquent in their child support payments. They served over 900 warrants against offenders in 21 counties.

Sheriff's officers worked jointly with local police to recover the back child support. That amounts to roughly 1.2 percent of the $14.3 million in delinquent child support payments.

In addition to noncustodial parents who were deliquent in their child support payments, the sweep also covered parents who failed to attend court hearings intended to establish payments for child support or the determination of medical expenses.

Delinquent child support payments were highest in Camden, Mercer, Middlesex and Monmouth Counties. All four counties had more than $1 million in outstanding child support payments, according to Judiciary Department records.

This "sweep" is certainly a step in the right direction in getting parents to pay their child support obligations. As I blogged about on numerous occasions, child support is not something to take lightly. There are ramifications such as the revocation of one's driver's license or getting your passport placed on hold if you don't pay child support. In fact, this has happened to several of our clients.

For more information on how to manage your child support obligations, contact an Orange County divorce lawyer for more information.

Source: Sweep Recoups $233,000 in Child Support

The excuses that people come up with in an effort to reduce their child support obligation is just amazing! In a prior post, I discussed the fact that Jermaine Jackson owes over $90,000 in child support and filed improper paperwork in his attempt to reduce his Los Angeles County child support payments. Now, further details are emerging concerning Jackson's request for a reduction.

It turns out that Jackson is claiming he was robbed back in September of this year. Jackson claims that a bag containing jewelry, watches and other expensive items was stolen from the home his family is renting. Ironically, about one week after this robbery, Jackson also filed court documents stating that he could no longer afford the $3,000 monthly child support payment for his children, Jaafar and Jermajesty.

From an Orange County divorce lawyer's perspective, there are some holes in this argument. First, how does stolen material possessions affect one's income? Afterall, child support is based primarily on income and timeshare of the kids. Sorry, but it doesn't matter if your Louis Vuitton garment bag, gold watches and family heirlooms have gone missing. That has no bearing on the calculation of child support. What matters here is the state of Jackson's employment and income.

Further, as set forth in an earlier post this month, Jackson owes over $90,000 in back child support. The fact that expensive material possessions were stolen is not going to eradicate the back child support accumulated thus far. Once that money is accumulated, Jackson has to pay that money back some way either by paying it in a lump sum or being placed on a payment plan.

My advise for Jackson and other people who are finding ways to skirt their child support obligations....don't have kids! Once you have kids, they are a permanent fixture and you will be financially responsible for them until they are 18.

For more information on Los Angeles County or Orange County Child Support issues, contact and Orange County divorce lawyer for more information.

Source: Jermaine Jackson Robbed, Files to Reduce Child Support Payments

If at first you don't succeed... try again in California. That appears to be the approach Michael Douglas' ex-wife Diandra is taking after a New York judge threw out her suit seeking half of the actor's earnings associated with the film Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.

As my colleague, Winiviere Sy, noted in a post last month, the former Mrs. Douglas - whose split with the actor was finalized way back in 1997, went to court in New York seeking a post-judgment modification. The crux of her claim is that because the couple's California divorce settlement entitles her to 50% of any money Douglas earns from movies he made while they were married, as well as 50% of his proceeds from any "spinoffs" from those films, she is entitled to half his income from the new "Wall Street" film. The movie, released last September, is a sequel to 1987's "Wall Street", for which Douglas won a Best Actor Oscar. Douglas plays the same character, financier Gordon Gekko, in both movies.

A key aspect of last month's dismissal in New York was the fact that it came on jurisdictional grounds. Diandra had sought to bring the issue before a New York court because both she and Michael now live there. Without taking any position on the merits of Diandra's claim, however, the judge threw out the case because, he said, it belonged in a California court, not a New York (the couple's divorce was originally concluded here in California). Now, according to the New York Post, Diandra is actively shopping for Southern California family law attorneys as she seeks to revive the case, probably in Los Angeles.

As an analysis by the Today Show noted, setting questions of jurisdiction aside, the case will turn on the question of whether a "sequel" and a "spinoff" are the same thing. Diandra says they are. Michael says they are not. The distinction is important because the couple's California divorce settlement has provisions for dividing assets from "spinoffs" but, apparently, says nothing about "sequels".

It is too early to say how successful Diandra's arguments will or will not be once they reach a Los Angeles or Orange County family court. What is certain is the important role careful legal work will play in the outcome - a reminder of the important role that finding the right Orange County divorce lawyer plays in any family law case.

New York Post: Diandra takes her case west

Today on NBC: Douglas' ex wants to cash in on 'Wall Street 2'

Monsters & Critics: Michael Douglas' ex-wife taking Wall Street cash battle to California

Former "Party of Five" actress Neve Campbell filed for divorce from her husband in Los Angeles Superior Court about five months ago. Among her requested relief in her divorce Petition was a request to prevent her ex husband from seeking spousal support from her. This legal manuever is very common. Higher wage earners typically request that the other party be prevented from seeking spousal support from the other party in the Petition. However, this does not mean the request will be granted. Campbell's soon to be ex-husband can certainly file an Order to Show Cause with the court seeking spousal support if during the marriage, she was the breadwinner and supported him.

As stated in my prior post, since this is probably a marriage of less than 10 years, Neve will only owe her ex spousal support for half of the length of the marriage, if he asks for it.

What are the factors that go into the determination of spousal support in Orange County or Los Angeles County courts? A program called the Dissomaster is utilized for the calculation of temporary spousal support requests. In order to determine permanent spousal support, the courts will rely on Family Code Section 4320 factors.

Here is a summary of 4320 factors:

In ordering spousal support under this part, the court shall consider all of the following circumstances:
(a) The extent to which the earning capacity of each party is
sufficient to maintain the standard of living established during the
marriage, taking into account all of the following:
(1) The marketable skills of the supported party; the job market
for those skills; the time and expenses required for the supported
party to acquire the appropriate education or training to develop
those skills; and the possible need for retraining or education to
acquire other, more marketable skills or employment.
(2) The extent to which the supported party's present or future
earning capacity is impaired by periods of unemployment that were
incurred during the marriage to permit the supported party to devote
time to domestic duties.
(b) The extent to which the supported party contributed to the
attainment of an education, training, a career position, or a license
by the supporting party.
(c) The ability of the supporting party to pay spousal support,
taking into account the supporting party's earning capacity, earned
and unearned income, assets, and standard of living.
(d) The needs of each party based on the standard of living
established during the marriage.
(e) The obligations and assets, including the separate property,
of each party.
(f) The duration of the marriage.
(g) The ability of the supported party to engage in gainful
employment without unduly interfering with the interests of dependent
children in the custody of the party.
(h) The age and health of the parties.
(i) Documented evidence of any history of domestic violence, as
defined in Section 6211, between the parties, including, but not
limited to, consideration of emotional distress resulting from
domestic violence perpetrated against the supported party by the
supporting party, and consideration of any history of violence
against the supporting party by the supported party.
(j) The immediate and specific tax consequences to each party.
(k) The balance of the hardships to each party.
(l) The goal that the supported party shall be self-supporting
within a reasonable period of time. Except in the case of a marriage
of long duration as described in Section 4336, a "reasonable period
of time" for purposes of this section generally shall be one-half the
length of the marriage. However, nothing in this section is intended
to limit the court's discretion to order support for a greater or
lesser length of time, based on any of the other factors listed in
this section, Section 4336, and the circumstances of the parties.
(m) The criminal conviction of an abusive spouse shall be
considered in making a reduction or elimination of a spousal support
award in accordance with Section 4325.
(n) Any other factors the court determines are just and equitable.

For more information on dissolution of marriage and spousal support, contact an Orange County divorce attorney for more information.

Source: Neve Campbell blocks spousal support After Filing for Divorce

California Family Code Section 4320

Any other celebrity couples getting divorced this week? The latest celebrity couple headed to divorce court are Ryan Reynolds and Scarlett Johansson. The ex-couple are reportedly living apart and have indicated that the split is amicable.

The couple was married in September of 2008 and have no children.

Usually, the holiday season for divorces is rather slow. Most people opt to wait until after the holidays to break up and divorce. For the sake of the children, couples want to wait until after the holiday season so as not to ruin the holidays for the kids. Luckily for these two, they don't have kids. Otherwise, other issues such as child support and child custody and visitation will arise.

In any event, it will be interesting to see if either party will request the payment of spousal support from the other or if both will just waive their rights to receive same. Luckily, this is a short term marriage of just a little over 2 years. We have stated many times that for marriages that last over ten years, the court will retain jurisdiction over spousal support and there is a chance that the payor could owe the recipient lifetime spousal support. For marriages less than 10 years, the payor will owe the recipient spousal support for one-half of the length of the marriage. This issue came up many years ago in the Tom Cruise/Nicole Kidman divorce.

For more information on filing for divorce, contact an Orange County divorce attorney for more information.

Source: Ryan Reynolds and Scarlett Johansson Will Divorce

From across the continent, and a different Orange County (the one in North Carolina), comes an interesting divorce story offering lessons as relevant to the California Coast as they are to the Outer Banks.

According to Local Tech Wire, Dennis Gillings, CEO of Quintiles, is struggling to bat down industry speculation that his Orange County divorce will have an adverse effect on the company. Quintiles is described by Local Tech Wire as "the world's largest life sciences services firm."

"This is a personal family matter, not for public comment," Gillings is quoted as saying, adding that he does not think his divorce will "impact" either the business or the company's management. Local Tech Wire, however, quotes an area publication, the Triangle Business Journal, as speculating that "fallout" from the case could "affect" the company.

As we have seen here in Southern California in the rather higher-profile divorce of the Frank and Jamie McCourt, business the ownership and management of a business can, indeed, become entangled in a divorce. How matters play out for Gillings - and for Quintiles' shareholders - will ultimately be determined by a number of factors that may no longer be within his, or their, control. Unlike California, North Carolina is not a community property state. Whether and how that fact effects the final outcome of this case will turn on other issues: how the couple's assets are structured and whether they signed any sort of post-nuptial agreement after, as Local Tech Wire reports, Gillings left his teaching post at the University of North Carolina to found Quintiles.

We are not in a position to know the answers to those questions. The lesson they hold, however, is of the importance of careful, detail-oriented legal representation in every aspect of family law. When moving toward an Orange County divorce it is important to seek skilled counsel at the earliest possible opportunity. Doing so is the best way to assure a smooth and equitable division of a couple's assets. Delays in starting the process are apt to lead to further complications down the line.

Local Tech Wire: Dennis Gillings doesn't believe divorce 'will have impact' on Quintiles

Dexter television stars, Jennifer Carpenter and Michael C. Hall, have decided to divorce. The characters who play brother and sister are reportedly ending their marriage after two years. Apparently, the couple have been separated for quite some time.

They couple wed on New Years Eve in 2009.

We have previously blogged about divorce and how to deal with the arduous process. To get the ball rolling, once one party decides they want to divorce the other party, a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage will have to be filed in the appropriate court. The Petition must then be personally served on the other party. Thereafter, the other party has 30 days to file a Response to the Dissolution of Marriage paperwork. From there, a slew of events can take place depending on if either party wants to petition the court for temporary orders such as child support, spousal support, child custody or visitation or property issues.

In order to discover information about the community estate, discovery procedures are then commenced. Preliminary Declarations of Disclosures are then exchanged. The dynamics of a case vary from one case to the other. If the other side is cooperative, the divorce will likely progress smoothly. In contrast, if the other side is bitter and uncooperative, things will likely get ugly.

At any rate, for more information on filing for divorce in Orange County or Los Angeles County, contact a reputable Orange County divorce attorney for more information.

Source: Jennifer Carpenter and Michael C. Hall of Dexter Divorcing

Big Brother Alum, Krista Stegall, successfully obtained another year's worth of protection in a victorious restraining order granted in her favor. According to the legal pleadings filed in Louisiana, Stegall obtained a restraining order againt her ex boyfriend, Kenward Bernis, after she accused him of beating her up in a bar last year.

According to TMZ, Stegall even called her ex to the stand and grilled him on how he allegedly grabbed her arms and shoved her inside the women's bathroom at Bootlegger's bar in Lafayette, Louisiana -- a bar her ex co-owns.

Bernis' lawyer tells TMZ, Boo "intends to comply with the Judge's order and have no further contact with Ms. Stegall moving forward." The protective order expires September 2011.

Clearly, if one is getting beat up, grabbed and shoved, it definitely warrants the issuance of a restraining order. From an Orange County family law perspective, it would be wise to obtain a restraining order from the family law court and the criminal court. Getting beaten and bruised is not something to take lightly. Orange County courts will usually err on the side of caution and issue restraining orders if they are valid.

For more information on domestic violence issues and obtaining restraining orders, contact an Orange County domestic violence lawyer, David Schwarz, for more information.

Source: Big Bro Alum Gets Court Victory....All By Herself

On Tuesday Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Scott Gordon issued a key ruling in the seemingly endless, blockbuster divorce of LA Dodgers owners Frank and Jamie McCourt. According to the Los Angeles Times, Judge Gordon invalidated the postnuptial agreement (technically known as a Marital Property Agreement, or MPA) signed by the couple in 2004.

MPA's, like a prenuptial agreement, are meant to remove agreed-upon assets from the purview of community property laws in California and other states. Under the terms of the McCourt post-nup Frank would, in the event of a California divorce, retain sole ownership of the baseball team while Jamie became sole owner of the couple's numerous homes. Granted that a 50% interest in the Dodgers would be worth immensely more than the couple's reportedly large collection of houses Jamie held that the agreement was unfair and, therefore, invalid.

Perversely, both McCourts claimed to have neither read nor understood the document before signing it. Judge Gordon rejected this testimony as "not credible," but focused his ruling on a more troubling legal issue. Specifically, in holding that the MPA does "not conform to California law" he cited the fact that Frank's Boston-based lawyer, who drew up the document, altered it after both McCourts had signed it and without telling either of them. "The Court finds that there has not been sufficient evidence presented to indicate which of the two materially inconsistent MPA's represented the actual intent of the parties," the judge wrote, according to the Times.

All of this, as the paper noted in a separate analysis, does not necessarily mean that Jamie now owns half of the team - she says she does, but Frank's lawyers have other arguments for his claim to sole ownership. It does mean that the issue will now be adjudicated during the next phase of their divorce trial. As I noted last month, the couple's California divorce recently became final despite the large number of outstanding property issues that remain to be resolved.

If there is any lesson for the rest of us to take away from this ongoing saga it is of the importance of careful legal work. When seeking an Orange County divorce attorney it is important that clients carefully consider the experience level of a prospective lawyer and ensure that they are both comfortable with and have a high level of confidence in, their choice.

Los Angeles Times: Judge's ruling in favor of Jamie McCourt is based on legal fundamentals

Los Angeles Times: Questions and answers about the McCourt ruling

USA Today: Judge invalidates McCourt agreement, leaving Dodgers ownership in question

In an earlier blog entry, I advised you that pop star, Christina Aguilera, filed for divorce from her husband, Jordan Bratman, citing irreconcilable differences. Another wrench has been thrown into the divorce mix now that several media outlets are reporting that Bratman refuses to vacate the family residence and has no plans to do so.

In fact, a source to Aguilera reportedly stated that "[i]t is difficult for Christina since he won't move out of the house,"

In these types of situations, the only way to get the other party to vacate the residence is to obtain a court order requesting exclusive use and possession of the house and that the other person be kicked out. If Christina wants her ex out, she will have to file an Order to Show Cause with the court requesting exclusive use and occupancy of the residence. Obviously, there should be valid grounds for requesting such relief. For example, if the couple's son is still residing in the house and if Mom has primary physical custody of son, it would make sense if she continues to reside in said residence. This will provide stability for the child and facilitate an easy tranfer to and from school, if the child's school is near the residence.

Whatever the reason may be, one party cannot just squat in the house. The parties are aferall going through a divorce and eventually a decision regarding the disposition of the house will need to be made. (e.g. keep the house, sell the house, buy-out the party's interest etc.) Regardless, retaining exclusive use and occupancy of a residence is just one issue that may arise in a divorce case. For more information, contact an Orange County divorce lawyer for more information.

Source: Christina Aguilera Divorce: Ex Still Won't Move Out

In a recent guardianship case, (mother and father are both incapable of caring for the minor child), Grandmother was awarded visitation with granddaughter on alternating weekends.

Father awarded visitation with daughter after having no visitation in several years. The case involved severe parental alienation and estrangement by mother. Judge ordered reunification therapy. Eventually, Father was awarded visitation with daughter.

Could marrying too young lead to divorce? Could conceiving a child out of wedlock lead to divorce? If you read between the lines, one could deduce that this is what happened with Jim Carey's daughter, Jane, and her husband.

It was reported earlier this week that Jim Carrey's daughter, Jane, has already separated from husband, Alex Santana, after only one year of marriage and after one child. The couple have one 9 month old child together, Jackson Riley.

As we have stated many times on this blog, divorce is never easy. Once children are involved, the process of divorce becomes amplified....emotions are involved, a child's life and future is at stake, child support issues arise, among other issues. Depending on the severity of the issues involving custody and visitation, sometimes a minors' counsel or an Evidence Code section 730 evaluator will have to get involved to determine an appropriate parenting plan for the child.

Either way, divorce is never easy. It's time consuming, stressful and emotional on all levels. An Orange County divorce attorney can assist you in any divorce related matter you may have.

Source: Jim Carey's daughter Jane Splits from Husband

Several recent articles in the Huffington Post's new "Divorce" section, along with the ongoing controversy over 2008's California Proposition 8 and a new law signed this fall by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger all are bringing the legal issues surrounding same-sex California divorce back to the fore.

The 2008 passage by voters of Proposition 8 outlawed same-sex marriage after a brief period when it had been legal here in California. Prop 8 is currently being challenged in court, but regardless of the outcome of those cases the law sets up an intriguing legal situation: if a gay couple married when doing so was legal in California can they still divorce now that the state no longer recognizes such unions? As I noted in a post earlier this year, the interim answer appears to be 'yes' though a number of issues (such as the status of same-sex marriages from other states) remain unresolved. Further, as I noted last spring, the state legislature has sought to address the legal differences that existed between dissolution of gay and traditional unions. That process came to fruition in September when the governor signed AB 2700, a measure designed to level the playing field by eliminating the extra complexities faced by same-sex couples seeking to dissolve a marriage or civil union.

The recent Huffington Post articles, however, take still another tack: looking at whether and how gay and lesbian break-ups differ from straight ones. As author Frederick Hertz writes, the fact that gay unions of any sort still exist in only a handful of states more or less ensures that "there's a strong likelihood that your legal questions will straddle the marital and non-marital dividing line." This is entirely understandable considering how new the entire concept of same-sex union is, legally speaking. Vermont's civil unions law, the first in the nation, went into effect only a decade ago. As a result, lawyers, courts and couples are still, in many ways, picking their way through relatively uncharted waters.

It is easy to write, as Hertz does, that "the right to marry conveys a right to divorce," but making that statement a reality for same-sex couples is proving to be a complex and, at times, confusing process.

More than anything else, this uncertain landscape reinforces the important role that your Los Angeles, San Bernardino or Orange County divorce attorney plays as advisor and advocate at every stage of the California family law process. Choosing the right Orange County divorce lawyer is the crucial first step in a process that should not have to be difficult and adversarial but, unfortunately, often is. A firm that offers combines compassion and personal service with deep experience in every aspect of California family law is your best choice when considering a divorce, be it the dissolution of a same-sex or a traditional marriage.

Huffington Post: Is Gay Divorce any Different Than Straight Divorce?

Huffington Post: The Right to Marry Conveys a Right to Divorce

Assemblywoman Fiona Ma: News Release on Gov. Schwarzenegger's signing of AB2700

The drawn-out California divorce of Avril Lavigne and Deryck Whibley became official late last month. Though the rock-star couple are both Canadian they were married in California four years ago, and eventually chose California for their divorce as well. According to E! Online a Los Angeles family court judge made the split official.

Divorce proceedings for the two rockers (Lavigne is a solo act, Whibley leads the band Sum 41) have largely taken place well-away from the public eye, but have not moved particularly quickly. E! reports that the couple split in September 2009, though as I noted in a post last January their professional relationship, at least initially, survived the marital break-up. At that time Whibley was still working with Lavigne as producer of her next album, but Lavigne was quoted as saying that divorce-related stress was spilling over into the studio and slowing down the creative process (the album - originally slated for release in 2009 still is not out).

The celebrity-watching website Monstersandcritics.com writes that in recent months, both Lavigne and Whibley have clearly moved on with their lives. Both have been frequently sighted in LA's clubs and other getaway spots accompanied by other partners. The website reports that the couple had a California prenuptial agreement but offers no insight on why a divorce that has been described as relatively clear-cut has taken over a year to finalize.

The answer, of course, may be relatively mundane: even a simple divorce takes time, and the existence of a prenuptial agreement does not mean that there is nothing to negotiate.

It is exactly because of situations like these - California divorce proceedings that turn out to be more complex than expected - that the advice of an experienced Los Angeles or Orange County divorce attorney is so important. At every stage of the process, it is imperative that anyone contemplating a divorce should seek out the valuable legal advice that a skilled Southern California family law expert can offer.

Monsters & Critics: Avril Lavigne's divorce finalized

E! Online: Avril Lavigne's Divorce Approved, Free to Get More Brody Jenner Tattoos

Yes. Another day, another person fails to pay their child support. I previously blogged about the consequences of failing to pay child support here. If you fail to pay court ordered child support, you could be sent to prison, get your driver's license revoked and your passport can also be placed on hold. Now, according to legal documents filed at the Los Angeles Superior Court, Jermaine Jackson owes his ex-wife $91,921.55 in overdue child support. Jackson has been ordered to pay $3,000 per month in child support but has not been making said payments.

According to Child Support Services Responsive pleadings, Jackson claims that his monthly income is $1,448 per month, but never filed the proper paperwork to support it. Jackson failed to complete pertinent sections on his Income and Expense Declaration (FL150). Additionally, although Jackson attached a Profit and Loss statement, it was only for a six month period. Profit and Loss statements should be prepared for the past 2 years. Because of Jackson's failure to file the correct paperwork, Child Support Services is requesting that Jackson provide evidence of all his earnings, royalties and or residuals from 2008 to 2009.

Additionally, Child Support Servies is also refusing to release Jackson's driver's license unless he makes a lump sum payment towards child support and enters into a reasonable payment plan, inclusive of principal and interest.

If you have a child support issue, its best to get it handled right away by filing an Order to Show Cause for modification of same. You never want your child support debt to continue to accumulate month by month because once that child support is incurred, you cannot recoup that money without filing an immediate Order to Show Cause.

For more information on any Orange County or Los Angeles County child support issues, contact an Orange County child support attorney.

Source: Jermaine Jackson-- Deadbeat Dad without wheels

I came across this article in CNNMoney.com about the tax consequences on inhertiances. Someone asked what are the tax rules for valuing assets that one party inherits in 2010?

Answer: The absence of the estate tax does not mean you won't have to pay taxes on an asset you inherit this year, says Mark Luscombe, principal tax analyst at CCH.

Historically, when a party inherited assets like stocks or a home, the tax basis was the fair market value at the time of death (i.e. stepped-up basis).

So, if someone sold a stock that was inherited by a grandmother that died, that person would have to pay capital gains taxes only on any price appreciation since her death.

The same is still true for estates valued below $1.3 million. However, under current law, if if you inherit substantial assets (i.e. small business your dad started decades ago) the decedent's original tax basis also carries over.

Bottom line, you would owe taxes on the increase in value since your benefactor owned the asset.

An there you have it! For more information on inheritances and its effect on a Southern California divorce, contact an Orange County divorce attorney for more information.