Orange County Divorce Lawyer Blog

An excellent article published earlier this month by Fox Business News outlines some of the pitfalls that dissolving a marriage holds for one's credit rating. The article makes several points that anyone contemplating an Orange County divorce would be well-advised to keep in mind.

First and foremost - and, it must also be said, unfortunately - it pays to be a bit wary of your soon-to-be-ex while going through the divorce process. "People do unpredictable things during emotional times," the article notes, citing a credit counselor. It goes on to describe a woman whose husband apparently ruined her credit on purpose by failing to honor a number of bills he had promised to pay.

From the perspective of an Orange County family law attorney, this is a reminder of why care and caution are always important. If a couple holds joint credit cards or other accounts it is critical that there be a written understanding of who will become responsible for what, and equally critical that each party prove to the other that its joint credit obligations have been met. Changing the names on everything from utility bills to in-store loyalty cards can be a surprisingly lengthy and frustrating process. The sooner it begins - and the more carefully each party monitors it - the smoother it is likely to be.

This is one of the aspects of divorce and the separation of assets where you might not think about your Orange County divorce lawyer, despite the fact that he or she can play a critical role. Drawing up legal documents in a careful and thorough manner, and then ensuring that both parties keep up their respective ends of the agreement is one of the most important services attorneys can offer clients. With it can come peace of mind during an otherwise chaotic and emotional time.

Fox Business: How to protect your credit during Divorce

After more than two years of sometimes bitter negotiations, Mel Gibson and his wife, Robin Moore, have reached "a full agreement including dividing their property" in a comprehensive California settlement agreement, according to the celebrity-tracking website Showbiz Spy.

Because Gibson and Moore were together for nearly 29 years - from 1980 to 2009 - pretty much everything Gibson has earned over his long film career is subject to California's community property laws, especially since it has been widely reported that the couple signed no prenuptial agreement. By some estimates Gibson's wealth approaches $900 million, the website reports.

In addition to financial issues, the couple have also tangled over custody of their seven children, as I noted in a post last year. Gibson also has a two-year old child with his now-estranged ex-girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva, with whom he is also engaged in California family law litigation. Though few details of the Gibson-Moore agreement have made it into the public realm, Showbiz Spy reports the agreement is expected to achieve final approval from the Southern California divorce court judge hearing the couple's case sometime next month.

The Gibson-Moore divorce offers a reminder that even particularly complex settlement issues can be resolved with a combination of perseverance and professional skill on the part of a Los Angeles or Orange County divorce and child custody lawyer. Southern California has seen a number of high-profile, high-net-worth divorces turn into expensive and protracted affairs in recent years. When the issues involved in an Orange County divorce are especially difficult, it can be reassuring to know that your attorney is with you for the long haul.

Los Angeles Times: Mel Gibson reaches divorce settlement with Robin Moore

Showbiz Spy: Mel Gibson reaches divorce settlement with wife

There is a fair amount of anecdotal evidence that the difficult economy of the last few years has led to a rise in requests for post-settlement modifications in Orange County, elsewhere in California and nationwide. Last week the New York Times ran a modification story with a twist: it is linked to the Bernie Madoff scandal.

Bernard Madoff's historically huge ponzi scheme has, of course, left an extraordinary number of high-profile victims in its wake, from Hollywood stars to local charities and the New York Mets. The sheer size and duration of his fraud has guaranteed that it will make its way back into the news again and again for many years to come.

According to the Times, the basics of the Madoff-prompted modification case are these: when Steven Simpkin and his wife Laura Blank divorced in 2006 "they agreed to split their considerable wealth equally." In dividing up their assets, valuing cash versus real property, Simpkin kept, among other things, the couple's account with Madoff (this may partly have been a matter of convenience as, the paper notes, it was held in his name). After Madoff's fraud was exposed - and accounts held with him became worthless - in late 2008 Simpkin filed suit demanding that his ex-wife "turn over millions of dollars that she had received in their settlement to make up for the substantial losses he had sustained in the fraud." Needless to say, Blank sees the situation differently, and the Times reports that the case is attracting considerable attention nationwide. As the paper notes, the court ruling will only, strictly speaking, impact New York's divorce laws, "but a decision by the influential (NY Court of Appeals) could influence how judges interpret laws in other states.

One might argue that Simpkin's investment account dropping to zero is not Brand's problem. Presumably if the family home she got in the settlement lost value when the real estate bubble burst she could not seek to get money back from him. But, as the paper notes, the issue is not necessarily that clear cut. The Madoff account was fraudulent from Day One, though neither spouse knew that at the time. With that in mind Simpkin is demanding a modification under a doctrine known as "mutual mistake." The idea is that since both spouses were honestly mistaken when they valued the account the settlement should be retroactively rebalanced. For her part, Blank is arguing, in effect, that enough time elapsed between the settlement and the exposure of Madoff's fraud that the doctrine should not apply, especially since her ex-husband continued to add to his Madoff account for many months after the settlement.

From the perspective of an Orange County divorce lawyer it is undeniable that this case is worth watching closely. Divorce law is, of course, governed by states and California is different from New York in a number of key respects (notably, by being a community property state). But the potential for an important precedent remains.

The New York Times: Madoff Victim Seeks a Divorce Do-Over

A court's ruling in a Southern California divorce case from San Diego, along with a bill making its way through the legislature in far-away Oklahoma, are bringing new attention to military retirement pay and how it is treated in divorce cases here in Orange County and elsewhere around the country.

According to a press release republished by PR Log, the San Diego case turned on the proper implementation of a 1997 California divorce settlement of a couple in which the husband was in the military. After the ex-husband retired in 2007, the ex-wife alleged, he failed to uphold their agreement.

The California case focused on what were essentially technicalities regarding the drafting and implementation of the original agreement and the wife's contention that these led to her being denied the full portion of her husband's military retirement pay to which she was entitled. If proposed legislation in Oklahoma passes, however, that share could shrink for spouses in future cases - a prospect that has other legislatures paying close attention and has sparked warnings that Oklahoma might become a haven for armed forces members seeking to dissolve their marriages.

The Oklahoma legislation would overrule a long-held federal standard that grants divorcees half of their ex-spouse's military pension. It would give those married less than ten years no right at all to an ex's military pension and would cut off pension payments if the spouse remarried. Even more significantly, it would make the pension distinct from other military benefits, such as danger pay and hostile fire pay, eliminating the ability of non-military ex's to claim a portion of those monies as part of a military divorce.

We will have to watch the Oklahoma legislation closely over the coming months, both to see whether it passes and to judge its effect here in California and in other states. As I have written on previous occasions, military service poses special problems and especially complex legal issues during an Orange County divorce proceeding. Division of assets and child custody issues are often stretched across state lines and can become unusually thorny. It is important for any Orange County divorce lawyer to stay on top of developments, like those in Oklahoma, which have the potential to impact divorcing couples here in California, whether by prompting new legislative moves in our own state, or by creating an apparent 'safe-haven' in which unscrupulous spouses may attempt to hide their assets during a contentious divorce proceeding.

PR Log: The Edmunds Law Firm Earns Favorable Decision in Military Divorce Case

Newson6.com: Proposed legislation on military benefits drawing national attention

Even as he embarked on one of the stranger high-profile celebrity media blitzes in recent memory Charlie Sheen, it now seems, was moving forward with a far more conventional Southern California child custody agreement with his third ex-wife, Brooke Mueller.

My colleague Winiviere Sy noted in a February blog post, the Sheen-Mueller divorce was finalized earlier this year. As we have discussed in this space on several previous occasions, however, the formal dissolution of a marriage does not necessarily mean that all outstanding financial and custody issues have been resolved. California law allows judges to end a marriage even as negotiations over a final settlement continue.

According to a recent article in The Hollywood Reporter, the couple's Los Angeles child custody issues have now been wrapped-up. The paper quotes a statement issued by attorneys for both Sheen and Mueller saying the pair have "reached an agreement that resolves their differences." No details of the agreement were released, but its existence moots a court hearing that was scheduled to take place tomorrow. That hearing was originally triggered a week earlier when Mueller obtained a restraining order against the actor after a trip she made with him and two other women to the Bahamas ended badly.

As Contactmusic noted in reporting the incident, the restraining order "effectively stripped the actor of all custody rights concerning the couple's children." The couple have two-year old twin boys. The stormy end of Sheen's marriage to Mueller had already led to his loss of most custody rights and curtailed visitation with the daughters he had with his second wide, the actress Denise Richards.

As an Orange County divorce lawyer, the striking thing Charlie Sheen's messy personal life demonstrates for the rest of us is how important it is to have competent, detail-oriented legal help when pursuing any Los Angeles or Orange County family law matter. Sheen's case is uniquely high-profile, but one need not be a celebrity or have one's personal life dissected on television to find that many family law actions - dissolution of the marriage, a financial settlement, child custody - are simultaneously in progress, all of them at different stages of resolution. Resolving these problems in a way that preserves your rights is an Orange County family law attorney's most important job.

Contactmusic: Brooke Mueller Agrees Custody Deal with Charlie Sheen

Hollywood Reporter: Charlie Sheen, Brooke Mueller Reach Custody Agreement

With tax time fast approaching this is a good moment to examine some of the ways in which an Orange County divorce can affect one's tax status. A fascinating article posted yesterday on the financial website Smartmoney.com examines the consequences of an obscure IRS provision known as the "Innocent Spouse Rule," touching on its particular role in divorce cases.

Briefly stated, the innocent spouse rule allows one spouse to avoid tax penalties related to a joint return if he or she can plausibly claim to have had no knowledge of what the other was doing in filling it out. As the article at Smartmoney.com makes clear, the term "spouse" can be slightly misleading, since the rule can also apply to divorced couples. That, of course, is good news. One of the sad realities of divorce, be it in Orange county, Los Angeles, San Bernardino or elsewhere, is that dissolving a couple's financial links can sometimes be a more complex process than dissolving the marriage itself.

Smartmoney, for example, cites a case from the 90s in which a woman "was denied an appeal after the IRS wouldn't let her claim the innocent spouse rule over a return prepared by her ex-husband." The point here being that tax obligations incurred during the marriage followed the woman even after her divorce. Smartmoney notes that the law was changed in 2004 to make innocent spouse claims easier to file. That, however, has led to a huge spike in the number of claims made under the law and has led the government, in turn, to view such claims with increasing skepticism.

On another key divorce-related tax issue, the IRS' innocent spouse rule Q&A page notes in several places that anyone whose name is on a joint tax return is responsible for the tax, interest and penalties related to that return - a fact which does not change "even if a divorce decree states that a former spouse will be responsible for any amounts due." In other words: your settlement may say your ex is responsible for the tax penalty, but, as far as the IRS is concerned, that is none of their concern; until someone pays the money you are both liable for it.

Issues such as these illustrate the important role an Orange County divorce lawyer plays throughout the process of dissolving a marriage and dividing up a couple's property. Without careful, detail-oriented legal advice a break-up can prove to have unanticipated, and far-reaching, consequences. An experienced California family law attorney can help clients avoid these pitfalls.

Smartmoney.com: More spouses off the hook for tax mess

IRS Innocent Spouse Questions & Answers Information Page

An essay on the subject of pets and divorce published earlier this month at The Huffington Post has been blogged and commented-upon widely over the last ten days or so. The article, by Jill Brooke (an author who describes herself as a "Blended Families Expert"), looks at the increasing prevalence of pet-related issues in divorce cases.

"According to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, attorneys have seen a 23 percent jump in pet custody cases," Brooke writes. A similar analysis at the pet-focused website Paw Nation notes that "today half of the 190 accredited law schools in the United States, including Harvard and Yale, offer courses in animal law" - a field that barely existed as recently as a decade ago.

Brooke presents a long string of anecdotes outlining the strife that pet custody can cause in a divorce proceeding. She writes that "dogs used to be viewed as property... But now courts realize that pets are members of the family and their best interests are being considered." That, however, is not an entirely accurate reading of the law, at least here in Orange County and elsewhere in California.

Perhaps the problem is one of terminology. We talk of "custody", and we may think in those terms regarding pets but, legally speaking, your dog and your kids are very different things. It is true that, here in California, legislation signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007 (SB 353) allowed courts to issue both custody orders and restraining orders in relation to pets. It is also true that many California divorce settlements contain provisions specifically related to pet custody and visitation. None of that, however, changes the fact that animals, legally speaking, are property and deciding who gets the pet is a property division issue. The terminology ("custody", "visitation") may be similar but the standards for deciding who gets the dog or cat should not be - and, indeed are not - the same as deciding which parent a child should live with.

Terminological distinctions like these are among the most important issues an Orange County divorce lawyer can help clients with. None of this is meant to minimize the emotional trauma that losing your pet in a divorce can engender. In negotiating an Orange County divorce, however, it is important to have the help of a skilled attorney who can help you understand how assets (pets included) differ from one another and who can help you sift through your own priorities in deciding what, exactly, is most worth fighting for.

The Huffington Post: Who Gets the Pet in a Divorce?

Paw Nation: Who gets the dog in a divorce?

Charlie Sheen and his estranged wife Brooke Mueller filed competing Los Angeles divorce petitions last week, according to a report in People magazine. The latest act in what has become a bit of a California family law soap opera raises questions about the status of the document the couple signed last summer. At the time, that document was widely described as a "divorce settlement," but if last week's reports concerning the petitions signed and filed by Sheen and Meuller are correct it is clear that matters between the couple are far from 'settled'.

People reports that Southern California child custody remains a significant sticking point between the two. Sheen, has requested "joint physical and legal custody" of the couple's 18-month-old twin boys. Mueller is seeking primary physical custody with only visitation rights for Sheen. According to CNN the boys have been living solely with their father since Christmas of last year, when a fight in an Aspen, Colorado hotel room landed Sheen in jail on domestic violence charges after Mueller claimed he threatened to kill her. According to CNN the felony assault charges "were reduced to a misdemeanor third-degree assault count in exchange for his guilty plea in August." Under that plea agreement the time Sheen later spent in a California rehab center was counted as his sentence on the Colorado conviction.

Even though Sheen and Mueller appear to have reached terms for a California divorce settlement back in June these latest developments indicate that the terms of their break-up are far from settled. The fact that they waited nearly five months after signing last summer's settlement before moving the case forward, and then wound up filing competing Los Angeles divorce petitions requesting significantly different child custody arrangements, indicates that a long, and potentially contentious, Southern California divorce proceeding may lie ahead of them. It is fair to ask whether the case will now be more difficult for both Sheen and Mueller because of their decision to wait so long before moving forward.

It is a basic principle of divorce law that nothing is final until a court issues a decree. This is something Los Angeles and Orange County divorce clients must always keep in mind while working with their divorce lawyer to craft a settlement. It can also be an important consideration in deciding when and how to move forward in LA or Orange County divorce court.

One of the most important services an experienced Los Angeles or Orange County divorce attorney can offer clients is advice on these and other nuanced aspects of California family law. Every couple's situation is unique. That, ultimately, is why skilled professional legal representation is so important.

CNN.com: Charlie Sheen makes it official - he files for divorce

People: Charlie Sheen Divorcing Brooke Mueller, Source says

In the latest twist in what is becoming a large - and very public - Southern California divorce proceeding, businessman Elon Musk has published a long essay at The Huffington Post to, in his words, "correct" the public record about his California divorce from ex-wife Justine and his financial situation.

As I originally noted back in May, Justine, a successful novelist, has taken to blogging about her divorce, using the public forum of the internet to defend her contention that the couple's post-marital agreement was "extremely harsh" and needs to be renegotiated. Several weeks later word began circulating in the business press that Musk was essentially broke - subsisting on loans from friends "and spending $200,000 a month while making far less."

In his Huffington Post article Elon Musk, one of the founders of PayPal, seeks to address the image those reports created: of a man so rich that he felt he could not scrape by each month on what, for most Americans, is a head-spinning sum of money. While stating that "I never said... I was "broke" or even that I lacked considerable assets," Musk claims that the vast majority of that monthly figure - $170,000 - is going to the accountants and lawyers working on his divorce-related issues. Another $20,000, he says, goes to Justine each month with the remaining $10,000 covering his own living costs. He also goes out of his way to defend his continued use of a private plane, saying it is essential to his work as head of both SpaceX, a company trying to bring commercial uses to space exploration and Tesla, an auto company that is preparing to launch an all-electric car aimed at consumers.

The on-going, very public, feuding of Elon and Justine Musk is a painful reminder of just how bitter and stressful some Orange County and Los Angeles divorces become. It is also a reminder how important it is to have an experienced Orange County divorce lawyer in your corner when entering this adversarial process. If your ex, or soon-to-be ex, is trying to complicate the California family law and divorce process or turn friends and neighbors against you by putting private details into the public domain, it pays to have an Orange County divorce attorney working on your behalf to correct the distortions.

The Huffington Post: Correcting the Record About My Divorce

Actor Michael Douglas and his first wife Diandra finalized their Southern California divorce a decade ago, but she now insists their California family court settlement entitles her to half of his profits from a movie that hasn't even been released yet. According to the New York Post, Diandra has filed suit in a New York court seeking half of the money Douglas will receive from "Wall Street 2", a sequel to his 1987 Oscar-winner. The movie is scheduled to premier in September.

According to the celebrity website PopEater, Diandra's claim is based on a clause in the couple's California divorce settlement giving her half of the proceeds from work Douglas did during the couple's marriage. Since Douglas plays the same character in the new movie that he did in the original, she is asserting that the forthcoming film fits the settlement's definition of "residuals, merchandising and ancillary rights".

According to the Post, Douglas' lawyers have filed papers claiming that a "sequel" is not the same thing as a "spinoff". Were the new film the latter, they say, she would have a case; but, they argue, it is the former - and that means she is not entitled to a cut. Douglas' lawyers are also arguing that California family court is the proper venue for the suit since the couple were divorced in the state. Diandra's attorneys say they filed in New York because that is where both of the ex-spouses now live.

This case highlights the fact that unexpected issues that can arise long after the fact in an Orange County divorce settlement. National media have recently highlighted cases of other long-divorced spouses (though, to be fair, not movie stars) seeking to renegotiate their settlement agreements because of changed economic circumstances. Such situations are moments when having an experienced Orange County divorce lawyer in your corner is of the utmost importance. A Los Angeles or Orange County family law attorney can help identify areas in your settlement that may become problems in the future, and can suggest ways to avoid trouble.

PopEater: Michael Douglas' Ex-Wife Wants a Piece of His 'Wall Street 2' Money

New York Post: Michael Douglas' ex-wife greedy for his 'Wall Street 2' $$

From an Orange County Divorce perspective, it's always interesting when people are involved in a divorce, they suddenly claim they are in a financial crisis and cannot afford to pay for anything. I'm not saying the decline in income is intentional but it certainly is coincidental. Turns out that Tiki Barber is now claiming that he cannot pay the divorce settlement owed to his ex-wife, Ginny Barber, after he was let go from NBC's "Today" show.

Barber left his wife of 11 years, Ginny, for a 23-year old blond former NBC intern. Barber alleges that his career is in shambles and that he is in financial woes because his contract for NBC for $300,000 ended. Indeed, Barber has not been on the air in many months. However, it is reported that Barber's contract was only formally terminated in May.

If you are presently engaged in a divorce, it is not a good idea to purposefully allege you are broke and are in a financial crisis if its really not the case. There are serious consequences for same. If you are in need of an Orange County divorce attorney, please contact a reputable family law attorney.

Source: 'Broke' Tiki Barber Can't Afford Divorce Settlement After Alleged Affair With NBC Intern

Although this story is not directly related to an Orange County divorce or family law matter, the ongoing lawsuit between Kobe Bryant, his wife and their former maid has reportedly come to an end. A lawyer for the former maid of the Bryant's, Maria Jimenez, who sued the Newport Beach couple in 2009, said Tuesday that both sides dismissed their claims.

Purportedly, the couple paid Jimenez $200,000 to drop her lawsuit, which alleged harassment and verbal abuse by Vanessa Bryant. The Bryants also dropped their counter-suit as part of the settlement.

Jimenez claimed Vanessa Bryant "badgered, harassed and humiliated'' her and also did not provide her with health insurance or pay her overtime. According to the complaint, Jimenez worked at the Bryant home six days a week, for 10-12 hours a day, from September 2007 to March 22, 2008, handling a variety of tasks that included housecleaning, laundry and cleaning up after the couple's children.

Jiminez claimed that after only two weeks on the job, Vanessa Bryant began a pattern of verbally abusing, demeaning, badgering and humiliating Jimenez by yelling, screaming and criticizing her in front of Kobe Bryant, the children and other employees.

Terms of employment included a salary of $50,000 a year and medical insurance for herself and her family, according to Jimenez. But when she needed surgery for an ovarian cyst, she found out she had no medical coverage, and her bills came to more than $120,000, according to her court papers.

Jimenez claimed the final straw was when Vanessa screamed at her for putting an expensive blouse in the washing machine, then demanded that she put her hand in a bag of dog feces to retrieve the price tag for the garment. Jimenez refused, saying she was quitting on the spot, but was forced to work until payday to pay for the $690 blouse, according to her lawsuit.

Luckily for both sides, this matter is over. It is not uncommon for matters, including Orange County divorce matters to settle out of court to avoid incessant litigation and incurring substantial attorney fees and costs. If possible and if the other side is willing to work out the issues, settling is a good option. For more information on how to settle your divorce out of court, contact an reputable Orange County divorce attorney.

Source: KTLA.com: Kobe Bryant, Wife Settle Lawsuit with Former Maid