Maryland Divorce Lawyer Blog

We discussed the pending same-sex marriage legislation in our February 25, 2011 blog. In our blog we touched briefly on the rights of same sex unwed couples with children and thought the topic could use a little further explanation because there are consequences to not having a legal tie to your child(ren).

Typically, when a same sex couple adopts a child, only one of them actually adopts the child from the agency, country, service, because two people without a legal tie to one another are generally not permitted to adopt a child together. Therefore, only one parent in a same sex unwed relationship is deemed to be the legally recognized parent of the child. This means only that “legal parent” can authorize medical treatments, make medical decisions, consult with therapists, obtain emergency care for the child, obtain school records for the child, make decisions regarding the child's 504 or IEP plan, meet with teachers, etc. For example, the parent who is not legally recognized as the child’s parent cannot authorize the pediatrician to administer inoculations, tests, draw blood, or prescribe medication. This is obviously a challenge for same sex unwed parents who otherwise share in the day to day parenting responsibilities of the child and are working together as a family unit to raise the child. Some of the difficulties can be cured by subsequent adoption proceedings, powers of attorney, and adding names to birth certificates. However, the costs, time and emotion involved are substantial.

Continue reading " The Children of Same-Sex Couples in Maryland " »

Maryland law defines dissipation as when "one spouse uses marital property for his or her own benefit for a purpose unrelated to the marriage at a time where the marriage is undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown." Sharp v. Sharp, 58 Md. App. 386 (1984). At issue is also whether or not the party spent or depleted the marital funds or property with the principal purpose of reducing the amount of funds that would be available for equitable distribution at the time of divorce. In a recent opinion by Judge Murphy on behalf of the Court of Appeals the Court faced the question as to who has the burden of proving that the assets had been dissipated. The case, Omayaka v. Omayaka was originally heard by the Circuit Court for Prince George's County for the final divorce hearing in July 2007. At this hearing the attorney for Mr. Omayaka attempted to prove that the wife had dissipated martial assets. Mr. Omayaka claimed that Mrs. Omayaka had opened up an account in her name only during their marriage and had withdrawn over $80,000.00 from the account since 2005. Mr. Omayaka’s attorney questioned Mrs. Omayaka on what the money was spent on and she stated clothing, food, insurance for the baby, rent, credit card debt, a car loan and the babysitter. At the conclusion of the case the Circuit Court found that there had not been a dissipation of assets because the attorney for Mr. Omayaka had not met the burden of proving that the money was spent for a purpose unrelated to the marriage during a time when the marriage is irretrievably broken. The attorney for Mr. Omayaka filed an appeal based on the contention that he had met his burden of proof showing dissipation of the assets. The Court of Appeals, in its’ opinion, clears up the burden of proof question with the following guide:

The alleging party must first put on a prima facie case that the marital assets were taken by one spouse without agreement with the other spouse. Then, the burden shifts to the alleged spending party to produce evidence that generates a genuine question of fact on the issues of whether the assets were taken without agreement, and/or where the funds are, and or were they used for marital or family expenses. However, the court points out that it is clear that the burden lies on the party who claims that the other party has dissipated marital assets to clearly prove that the funds were spent solely to reduce the money available for equitable distribution.

Continue reading " Recent Maryland Court of Appeals Case on Dissipation " »

As the Baltimore Sun reports, the Maryland Senate approved the Civil Marriage Protection Act on Thursday, February 25, 2011, which would allow same-sex couples to wed. Although the House of Delegates still needs to pass the Act, the Senate’s passage is still “historic.” We have previously blogged about the issues that surround the recognition of same-sex marriages in Maryland, specifically the Attorney General’s support of recognizing same sex marriages created validly in other states maryland and Maryland lawmakers attempt to block gay marriages. With this Act being passed by the Senate, it is time for us to prepare for changes we may see in our divorce and family law practice with the allowance of same-sex marriage.

The potential changes are vast but include the changes that we will see in custody and visitation law. Often same-sex couples adopt a child, however when couples are not married, only one partner is usually the legally recognized adopted parent. When these relationships end, the child is left with one legal parent and one who is presently recognized as a third party (not a parent) in the State of Maryland. For more information on the third party status that same sex parents currently face see our November 27, 2009 blog. With the passage of this legislation, same-sex couples who marry and adopt a child will both be the legal parents of the child and will be recognized as same should the marital relationship end in separation and/or divorce.

Continue reading " Same-Sex Marriage in Maryland " »

As previously discussed in our August 15, 2009 blog, a divorce in Maryland may be filed on a no-fault basis (mutual and voluntary separation), after a one year separation period. Although parties may agree to file on a no-fault basis, they may not agree on the issues within their divorce, such as custody, property, alimony, etc., which renders the case contested. However, there are many cases where the couples were only married for a brief period of time, or do not have children, where clients come to us with not only a no-fault ground, but also no issues to resolve. They may have worked out a separation agreement before coming to us, or simply have no shared property to dispose of. In these cases, we must file for a divorce just as we would any other, but the courts have procedures in which these cases can be set in for the final divorce hearing much quicker than others. However, before the case can be set in for this hearing, the opposing side must file an Answer that confirms that the case is in fact uncontested and all issues are resolved. The final hearing is also much shorter than a normal hearing.
Even in an uncontested divorce that has been filed on a mutual and voluntary basis, the party must still prove the grounds for divorce. In Maryland, you must still have a corroborating witness at the hearing to testify that you and your spouse have lived separate and apart without cohabitation and without the resumption of the marital relationship (including sexual relations) for one year (or two in a two year separation ground), and there is no hope or expectation of reconciliation in your marriage. The witnessfurther needs to corroborate that the separation was in fact a mutual and voluntary one on the part of both husband and wife. The Maryland Code, Family Law § 7-101(b) states, “a court may not enter a decree of divorce on the uncorroborated testimony of the party who is seeking the divorce.” We have had many clients ask why when they have such a simple, issue free divorce they still have to jump through so many hoops. Unfortunately, even in what can be called a “simple divorce”, you still must meet the filing requirements and present the court with the evidence that is statutorily required to prove you are entitled to obtain a divorce.
For more information regarding Maryland divorce proceedings contact an experienced Maryland Divorce Attorney.

Many Maryland divorce attorneys believe that the one year separation period required for a no-fault divorce in Maryland is too long as reported by the Maryland Daily Record on February 14, 2011. For more information on the one year separation period for a divorce see our October 14, 2010 blog and August 19, 2009 blog . A number of attorneys supporting the reduction of this separation period arrived at a state Senate committee hearing last week to support legislation that would reduce the one year separation requirement to six months. Many attorneys feel that if the parties have agreed to split they should be able to do so without having to drag out the process for a full year. However, many of the Senators feel that this separation period validates the sanctity of marriage and gives people the time to think if this is what they truly want. Unfortunately, it has not been our experience that this waiting period helps parties to reconcile. As the Daily Record reports, many states such as Virginia, Delaware and Washington D. C. have only a six month separation period. We have many clients who come to us after a week or two of being separated and the news that they must wait a year to file for an absolute divorce is crushing. However, there are other options for these clients, such as filing for a limited divorce, as describe in our March 19, 2010 blog, or pursuing a separation agreement.
For more information regarding Maryland divorce proceedings contact an experienced Maryland Divorce Attorney.