Singer, Adele, has filed for divorce from her husband, Simon Konecki. She plans to co-parent their son, Angelo, age 6. This is a major child custody issue that is the forefront of their divorce.
The singer, who filed for divorce from her estranged husband in Los Angeles, cited irreconcilable differences as the reason for the split.
Spousal support, as well as the separation of their assets and properties, will be determined in mediation, according to the documents. Support can be long term financial concern for parties during a long term marriage so hopefully that part of the divorce can be settled during the mediation process
According to several media outlets, it is believed that she and Konecki did not sign a Prenuptial Agreement prior to the marriage. This could mean any property acquired by the parties during the marriage will be divided through community property laws. One of the benefits of signing a Prenuptial Agreement prior to getting married is to protect your separate property assets. Another benefit is that if you plan to be married for a long time, you have the ability to set limitations on how much spousal support or alimony will be paid out depending on the length of the marriage. Usually people that have been successful will have a prenuptial agreement written prior to the marriage to ensure her long term royalties do not become split among the parties. Even so Adele could have attempted to draft a post nuptial agreement is she so wished to protected what she had made thus far from her lucrative career and protect all the royalties that she made and would make in the future.
According to California law, in the event of a divorce, in a marriage of ten years or less, the recipient of spousal support is entitled to spousal support for one-half of the length of the marriage. So, for instance, if a couple marries and divorces after 8 years of marriage, the recipient of spousal support will only be entitled to spousal support for a period of only 4 years.
Another interesting issue that has come up in Adele’s divorce filing is that she chose to file for divorce in California. Adele also is a British citizen so going back to England to file a divorce would not be out of the question. She could make things really difficult with custody issues as well by dividing the child between the two countries. However she did not do this. Apparently, the former couple own property in California and Konecki’s business is based out of California. This brings up residency issues. You cannot simply file a divorce petition based on the fact that you own property in that State. In order to obtain residence in California, you must have been a resident of the state for at least 6 months and in the county where you intend to for for at least 3 months. I believe Adele lives somewhere in Beverly Hills so if that is the case, she could file her Petition for Dissolution of Marriage in California and in Los Angeles County provided she meets the residency requirements.
Bachelor’ creator Mike Fleiss’ divorce is final; ex-wife drops assault allegations
Nipsey Hussle sadly passed a few months ago from gun shot wounds. He left behind a daughter whom is now resides with the family of Nipsey Hussle. A Petition for guardianship has been filed in Court by Nipsey’s sister. A Guardianship works similarly like a child custody action in family law court. The Court uses the best interest standard to determine what is best for the child. It is similar to a family court proceeding.
News of Adele’s impending divorce from her husband Simon Konecki was a surprise to many, and many more were surprised that the star and her husband had not signed a pre-nuptial agreement. Under California law, Konecki may be entitled to up to half of the singer’s earnings from the time they were married. If they choose to file in California, where they own significant property and Konecki has an office for his company, the pair might have to split everything evenly. Adele has already gifted Konecki a property worth over $600,000, which some see as an indication that the split may be amicable. Adele herself said in a Vanity Fair interview that money is “not that important a part of my life.”
The lack of a pre-nup may seem unusual in the cynical climate of Hollywood’s almost contractual atmosphere surrounding relationships and even marriage. There is a perception that pre-nups are a fact of life, and that all wealthy people have them. In fact, only around 5% of married couples have pre-nups, and only 15% of divorcees say they regret not having had one. There are obvious caveats – Steven Spielberg found out the hard way that pre-nuptial agreements need to be an actual legal document, a literal back-of-the-napkin mistake that cost him a $100 million settlement. Both sides need appropriate counsel and a thorough accounting of their assets, which can make the cost of a pre-nup financially impractical for some.
The other side of the debate over pre-nups is emotional, grounded in a perception that such a document, or even the desire to sign one, is inviting the relationship to fail, tempting fate, or making it easier to get out of. It can even be seen as an indication that there is no trust in the relationship. The reality is, a pre-nup is an important legal tool, one which can be used to protect family assets, ease transitions, and hold individuals accountable. In a climate where up to 50% of marriages end in divorce, a pre-nup can be invaluable.
Social media influences everything these days, from pop-culture to even divorce. To elucidate this point, simply try to find one person in your family, or among your friends, or peers at work that does not have a Facebook account. It is everywhere, unavoidable, and ineluctable. The courtroom is not immune to its presence either. When divorce is involved, the question of electronic evidence, and social media evidence, in particular, comes into play in various ways. Modern relationships fall hazard to the sometimes illicit goings-on of spouses that end up publicized for all the world to see.
Attorneys have to account for these modern times and the Facebook or Instagram posts. Instagram has become the new forerunner of posts into the personal lives of parties. People must become aware that once a divorce opens up on Court the social media accounts become public record. That is to say that they provide an instant insight into happenings of the parties real personal lives and their true feelings about one another and what they are hiding from the divorce proceedings and the court.
The numbers don’t lie here. Social media is affecting relationships and being brought to bear on divorce litigation in serious and important ways. For a lawyer to effectively use (or defend against) social media evidence in a divorce case, he or she needs to understand both the ramifications of admitting such evidence and the legal precedent therein.
The Singer Beck and his wife of 14 years have decided to call it quits and get divorced after a 14 year marriage. The pop star decided it was over after Valentines day this year and gave her the news. Beck is a practicing Scientologist so it adds a twist as to how the two children will be raised post split up. In child custody cases religion can be a major source of conflict on raising the children. This might create a high conflict child custody dispute. The two children are eleven years old and 14 years old. Becks wife is Marissi Ribissi who is the brother of Giovanni Ribissi.
In addition, Beck is actively involved in movie projects which could effect the division of divorce property for the two exes. Movie project residuals will cause a dispute among Hollywood A listers when they get divorced. Earlier this week, Beck released a song called “Super Cool” for the soundtrack of “The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part.”
Beck has won seven Grammy’s in his career, including Album of the Year in 2015 for “Morning Phase.” He won two at this year’s awards: Best Alternative Music Album and Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical.
Many people feel that if they are going to get divorced they need to find a least adversarial way in order to resolve all the issues of the divorces such as Spousal support, Child support, and property division. And thus recently there has been a push by many divorcees to go the that way. However, issues have arisen that might be an impediment to an easy mediation, divorce free conflict amongst litigants going through a divorce. Everyone believes and rightfully so that everything during the mediation process remains confidential and thus all agreements are set in stone. However, such is not the case.
A recent article from The National Law Review cited a recent case where the confidentiality provision of the medation agreement did not get signed. Therefore the alleged agreement between the parties was not proven to be an agreement in the Court of Law. As a result all the hard work and time and and effort put into paying a mediator and getting a divorce agreement done out of court was for nought. This kind of situation can occur more likely than not if your mediator or the parties are not experienced at doing the mediation process. In the case cited above the alleged agreement between the parties could not be show in the court of law because the parties never signed a waiver of confidentiality clause. Therefore the agreement could not hold weight nor was admissible in the Court of law.
In order for the mediation agreement to be a part of the Divorce proceedings the parties would have needed to sign a waiver of confidentiality which would then let the mediation document become admissible in a court of law. Normally all mediations are confidential and therefore cannot be brought into the legal setting without a waiver of confidentiality signed by both parties.
In June, Kentucky will become the first state to require a presumption of equally shared parenting in child-custody cases even when one or more parents is opposed. While it’s common for states to prefer joint custody when both parents are amenable, Kentucky’s presumption will apply even without divorcing parents on board. This is a major breakthrough in developing a parenting plan that is often difficult and expensive to come by in family law Courts in California and across the United States.
Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin signed the measure in April, declaring that judges must presume “that joint custody and equally shared parenting time is in the best interest of the child” in almost all divorce cases. Last year, Kentucky required the same presumption for temporary child-custody cases while divorce is pending. Again, for a state to implement such a broad and powerful message to family law courts across America and Kentucky is quite outstanding. Custody is often so tumultuous to fight in court that to add a presumption of 50/50 without any fighting in court is really setting a different type of family law custody standard now.
Exceptions exist for situations “involving an incident of domestic violence within the preceding three years” or where “there has been a domestic violence order entered” or being entered. Obviously when there is violence the joint custody presumption must be sidelined in order to keep the child safe from any potential violence or abuse.
“It was quicker, cheaper and easier on so many levels – emotionally, mentally, spiritually and physically – than a lot of other horror stories I’ve heard,” she said.