Published on:

On Saturday, November 12, 2011, the Carroll County Times provided commentary on the differences between celebrity divorces, such as Kim Kardashian, and divorces for residents of Maryland. As we reported in our April 18, 2011 blog, as of October 1, 2011, Maryland has eliminated the 2 year waiting period to seek a divorce, making obtaining a divorce in Maryland a bit easier, although not as easy at it is for Kim K.

Previously, one filing for a divorce had to specify whether both parties, or just the moving party was seeking the divorce. If both parties were seeking a divorce, then only a one year separation period was required, if only one party was seeking the divorce, then a two year separation period was required. This distinction is no longer as of October 1, 2011 and separation, whether mutual or non mutual is only required to be one year to file for a divorce. As we mentioned in our April 18, 2011 blog, proponents of this legislation believe that it is one step closer to reducing the waiting period to obtaining a divorce, making a Kim K. divorce a future reality for Marylanders.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

In our August 25, 2011 blog we discussed custody evaluation as one of the services that can be available to parties subject to domestic litigation. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County is one of the County courts that currently offers custody evaluations to those litigants with highly contested custody matters. They also offer co-parent education classes, custody mediation, home studies and supervised visitation. These services are currently offered to parties who qualify at no cost. The litigant or the litigant’s attorney needs to either file a motion with the Court requesting these services or request the service at the scheduling conference.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Many times in cases where I represent the Father in a Maryland custody case, child support is often an issue where perhaps some believe the man is treated somewhat inequitably. While I do not necessarily agree that is always the case, I have heard many Father’s say “If I were a woman, child support would not even be an issue, I would get what I am supposed to get.” Well for all those Dad’s out there, I am happy to report that I recently successfully argued a ‘voluntary impoverishment’ case. In this case, the non-custodial parent (who happens to be a Mother) is being forced to pay child support based upon what she has the ability to earn because the Court determined she was not doing so at the time of the hearing.

Voluntary Impoverishment cases are difficult cases to prove unless the non-custodial parent basically admits s/he not working to avoid paying child support. In Maryland, for the purposes of child support guidelines, a parent shall be considered “voluntarily impoverished” whenever the parent has made the free and conscious choice, not compelled by factors beyond his or her control, to render himself or herself without adequate resources. The factors a Court will consider in making such a determination as to whether a parent is a voluntary impoverished are: (1) his or her current physical condition; (2) his or her respective level of education; (3) the timing of any change in employment or other financial circumstances relative to the divorce proceedings; (4) the relationship between the parties prior to the initiation of divorce proceedings; (5) his or her efforts to find an retain employment; (6) his or her efforts to secure retraining if that is needed; (7) whether he or she has ever withheld support; (8) his or her past work history; (9) the area in which the parties live and the status of the job market there; and (10) any other considerations presented by either party.

In the particular case, after considering all of the above factors the key factor for the Court was (5) her efforts to find and retain employment. At the first hearing, the Court actually ordered the Mother to make a certain number of applications each week of which a certain number had to be in person interviews, not just on-line applications. When we returned for the second hearing, the Mother had a stack of unorganized computer print outs, which although requested to be provided prior to the second hearing date, were not provided until we were in Court that day. After a review of the documents and a cross examination that revealed the Mother was limiting her availability for potential employers; turned down a job because she didn’t want to start when they offered; and was not wearing appropriate interview attire, the Court found that the Mother was voluntarily impoverishing herself. As a result the Court imputed her an income equivalent to that which she had the ability to earn. The icing on the cake for my client was that the Court also imposed monetary sanctions for the Mother’s failure to timely provide the documents brought to Court on the date of the second and final hearing. At the end of the day, this particular Dad is finally receiving a decent amount of child support based on what the Mother has the ability to earn and is really a victory for all custodial parents, whether you happen to be Mom or Dad.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

As we have explained in previous blogs, in most counties in Maryland, the first scheduled court date once litigation has commenced is a scheduling conference. This is an opportunity for the litigants to tell the Court what hearings/trials they will need and court services they might need. Among those services to ask for may be a custody evaluation. In counties such as Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County custody evaluations are available at no cost in those custody cases where a Judge or Master can be convinced it is necessary. These would typically be cases where custody is highly contested or other exceptional circumstances exists (an unfit home, potential abuse, etc). A description of the custody evaluations performed in Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County can be found at their respective websites.

Depending on the county where the evaluation is ordered, an evaluation typically involves a meeting with both parents with the children, possibly a visit to each parent’s home, and interview with those who frequently interact with the parents and children (counselors, school staff, family members). Once the evaluation is completed, a report is typically drafted by the evaluator where he or she will recommend a custody arrangement and their reasons for recommending same. The Court may set in a conference date for the parties to review the evaluation, or the evaluation will be sent to the parties and/or their attorneys.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

In our June 28, 2011 blog we discussed how Courts in Maryland seem to be divided on whether same sex couples legally married in other states should be granted a divorce in Maryland. To confuse matters even more, as reported by the Maryland Daily Record on June 24, 2011, a criminal Judge has ruled that same sex couples are permitted to assert their spousal privilege in criminal matters. So while some family law Judges may not recognize same sex couples as spouses, it appears that some criminal Judges are. In the Washington County case, the lesbian partners were married in Washington D.C. Recently, one has threatened the other with violence, and therefore was charged with assault. However, in criminal matters spouses can invoke their right not to testify against their spouse. In this case, the victim of the alleged threat has asked to assert her privilege not to testify against her partner. The Judge has recognized the partners as spouses and allowed her to do so. The Judge specifically ruled that “Maryland generally recognizes a marriage as valid as long as it was valid in the jurisdiction in which it took place.”

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

On June 24, 2011 New York passed the law allowing same sex couples to wed in their state. New York is the sixth state to allow same-sex couples to wed, following Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington D.C. Like the bill that was proposed, but failed, earlier in Maryland this year, the law in New York will call for religious exemptions, meaning that there will be strong protections in place for religious groups that oppose gay marriages. New York does not have a residency requirement for marriage, so commencing July 24, 2011 it is predicted the state will see a lot of same sex couple weddings.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

As we had previously reported in our March 1, 2010 blog the Maryland Attorney General issued an opinion in February 2010 that states Maryland should recognize same sex marriages performed legally in other states as valid marriages in Maryland. However, the bill to allow same sex couples to marry in Maryland did not pass in the legislature this term. This has left Maryland Courts in limbo with how to handle same sex couples who file for divorce. Local news station, WTOP, reported on Friday, June 24, 2011 that a local Prince Georges County same sex couple was recently denied a divorce based on “the unnatural circumstances of their marriage.” The Judge specifically stated in his opinion “to recognize the alleged marriage would be contrary to the public policy of Maryland.” The Prince Georges County couple has filed an appeal with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals.

As reported there have been three instances in Maryland where a same sex couple has filed for the divorce, and only one in Anne Arundel County has been granted. This leaves same sex couples with the options of filing in Maryland with an unknown outcome, moving to another state that recognizes same sex marriages to establish residency and file, or staying married. Attorneys and same sex couples will await the Court of Special Appeals ruling on the Prince George’s County case for guidance on the subject.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Most family law matters, such as divorce proceedings, and custody proceedings, do not involve the Maryland criminal system, or involve any imminent punishment such as jail time. However, when a non-paying child support obligor (parent who is supposed to be paying child support) is brought to court after the child support obligee (parent who is supposed to be receiving child support) files a Petition for Contempt, that obligor may be sentenced to jail time. Because this obligor faces jail time at this contempt proceeding, the proceeding, while civil in nature borderlines a criminal proceeding because of the punishment that can be imposed. While criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney have the option of obtaining a public defender, civil defendants in most cases do not. Therefore, it has often been a question whether these non paying child support obligors are entitled to an attorney due to the threat and/or possibility of incarceration?

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Many clients come to me unclear as to their rights to their marital home. If your home is owned and was purchased during your marriage, it is a marital home. Martial property is defined as “the property, however titled, acquired by 1 or both parties during the marriage.” Maryland Code, Family Law § 8-201(3). Therefore, absent a protective order, discussed in our August 2009 blog, no one has the authority to make their spouse leave the home. If your home is rented and both names are on the lease then no one has superior rights over the other and therefore, no one has the authority to make their spouse leave the rented home.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

As a follow up on our June 10, 2011 blog more regarding adultery and introducing a new relationship to your child(ren), we thought it may be best to touch on dating during your divorce proceedings. Typically, we advise clients to refrain from dating while their divorce is pending and we do so for several reasons.

First, as explained in the previous blog, it could be considered adultery to be dating while married if your spouse can prove the elements necessary to establish adultery. Although parties may be separated while waiting for a divorce, they are still technically married and therefore, it is still considered adultery, which is both a ground for divorce and a crime in the State of Maryland.

Second, it may not be what is in the best interest of your child(ren) and if you are not putting your child(ren)’s best interest first then you may be facing an uphill battle if custody is an issue in your matter. While dating may not offend a Judge, it will not be helpful to your case if the Judge feels that your children are being negatively affected by your dating life and you have still chosen to partake in it. Even if the individual you are dating is wonderful and wonderful to your child(ren), your children are still going through a major adjustment period and to have one or possibly two new individuals then become a part of their homes and time with their parents may not be what is best. Additionally, while your children may not overtly be exhibiting problems as a result of your pending divorce, it is best to be able to focus all of your attention on them during your time with them to be aware of any issues they may be experiencing.

Third, it is always better to do the right thing, even if your spouse is not, while a divorce is pending. Many clients are frustrated by their spouse’s continued misbehavior and feel that it will continue to go unnoticed. If and when it is noticed and considered by a Judge, then it is much better to be on the “clean hands” side of that dispute. Two wrongs never make a right.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

A bill has been proposed in Massachusetts that would prevent parents from having sex in their home until their divorce is final, Fox News Reported on May 19, 2011. More specifically, the bill would prevent divorcing parents from “conducting a dating or sexual relationship within the home” until their divorce is final. Those who favor the bill have stated that the bill is meant to shield children from unnecessary problems or domestic violence while their parents divorce is underway. Those who oppose the bill say it is infringing on parents rights.

Currently, not only is adultery a ground for divorce in Maryland, it is still codified as a crime in the Maryland Criminal Code. In our experience, it is wise to consult a mental health professional before introducing your child to a new relationship, especially while a divorce is pending. The effects of a divorce on children vary from child to child, however a mental health professional can provide some guidance and advice based on the child’s developmental, emotional, and physical age.

A Maryland court will not likely ban such behavior if asked to do so by a litigant during their divorce proceedings, but will often consider a parents behavior and the effects of that behavior on the child(ren) when looking at what is in the best interest of the child(ren) in a custody determination.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

A divorce or separation is much more than two people parting ways, as there are often many other items that arose out of the marriage that must be resolved in order for parties to legally part ways. These items can be addressed in a separation agreement or are eventually resolved in divorce litigation. It is important to consider each of the following items at the beginning stages of pursuing a Maryland divorce:
• Child Custody – If you and your spouse have children, then custody of the children will need to be decided. Custody is comprised of two parts in Maryland, legal custody and physical custody. Legal custody involves decisions regarding the child involving health, education and religion. Physical custody is the time spent with each parent. Both forms of custody can be shared by parents, or awarded to only one parent. For more information see our September 10, 2010 blog.
• Child Access Schedule – Not only does custody of the children need to be decided but also when each parent will have access with the children. You need to consider the school year, summer vacation, holidays and school breaks. Also many parents designate how their children will communicate with the other parents when not in their care • Child Support-Child support is awarded in many cases to account for a difference in time sharing of the children, or a difference in income of the parties. For more information on child support, see our September 11, 2009 blog
• Dependency Exemption for Child(ren)- You need to consider who will designate the children for purposes of the tax dependency. Will you and your spouse alternate, each take one child, etc?
• Health Insurance – You need to consider who will cover the children on their health insurance. Also, if you are currently covered by your spouses insurance, or covering your spouse, will you continue to do so until your divorce is final?
• Uninsured Medical Expenses for Kids-Typically parties may divide this evenly or in proportion to their incomes. If one parent is bearing the whole expense, and it is significant, it will be used for child support calculations.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

As we have previously discussed in our blogs, many family law matters are decided outside of Court, with the assistance of attorneys. However, what happens when the parties, who have employed attorneys to assist in their divorce litigation, decide to take matters into their own hands? As the Maryland Daily Record reported on June 2, 2011, the Baltimore law firm of Tydings and Rosenberg is facing such a situation right now. The firm’s client, Julie Zorzit, after employing the firm to do a substantial amount of work, met privately with her husband, John Zorzit, and waived all rights for her attorney’s fees to be paid by her husband. The firm is now seeking the fees, as Ms. Zorzit can not afford to pay for the work that has already been done, but Mr. Zorzit can. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County denied the firms request for the fees, the case was appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals, and a decision is awaited.

Many clients inquire as to their rights to have their spouse pay for their attorney fees in their divorce matter. The Maryland Code, Family Law Article § 7-107 provides that “at any point in a proceeding under this title, the court may order either party to pay to the other party an amount for the reasonable and necessary expense of prosecuting or defending the proceeding….[however] before ordering the payment, the court shall consider: (1) the financial resources and financial needs of both parties; and (2) whether there was substantial justification for prosecuting or defending the proceeding.” Parties should not rely on the possibility of such an award when employing counsel, as in our experience, attorney fees are often denied. However, there are cases where attorney fees are absolutely justified and the Court makes an appropriate award.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

As many of our clients are aware, going through a divorce process once is enough, let alone having to do it all over again. As the New York Times reported on May 30, 2011 , a New York man, Mr. Steven Simkin, is seeking to revise the divorce settlement him and his wife, Ms. Laura Blank reached in 2006, as the funds he was awarded were lost as a casualty to the Madoff disaster. As we have previously discussed, many parties reach a separation agreement or settlement agreement outside of court which resolves their marital issues.
When the parties reached their settlement in 2006, Ms. Blank chose to keep her funds out of the Madoff account, while Mr. Simkin chose to keep his with Mr. Madoff. Mr. Simkin argues that the settlement agreement, aka a contract, should be voided as the funds with Mr. Madoff did not even exist at the time of the divorce settlement. His argument relies on the “doctrine of “mutual mistake,” a well-established principle that allows for the cancellation of contracts, including divorce agreements, when both parties are innocently mistaken about an essential term. The case is currently with New York’s highest court and it is said that they are divided, as are many attorneys on the issue. The case could not only affect New York law, but the way that marital settlement agreements are handled throughout the country. Those who are against the revision of the agreement believe that it would allow for do-overs whenever an agreement does not go as planned. Many enter into these divorce agreements with no idea what the future holds, but it is a way of making a clean break from your spouse and moving forward.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

As a family law practitioner I have represented a number of petitioners and respondents in protective order hearings throughout the state of Maryland. Unfortunately, the purpose and intent of a protective order is often misinterpreted and misused by the litigants. The purpose of the domestic violence statute as defined by Maryland case law is to protect and aid victims of domestic violence by providing a quick and effective remedy and to prevent further harm to the victim. It is not intended to produce pendente lite orders relating to custody, support, and marital property that are effective for the duration of the Protective Order. Oftentimes, Petitioners attempt to use this necessary and important statute to do just what it was not meant to do – obtain custody of a child in common with the respondent.

I recently represented a respondent in a Final Protective Order hearing , in which the petitioner used the staute to attept to gain custody of their chid. In that case the petitioner alleged an assault upon him by the respondent that resulted in their infant child being bounced off the bed, where she was laying at the time, and landing on the floor. The police were called to the residence three times over the course of less than 24 hours and no one was arrested or left the residence. Ironically, the respondent fled the state the next day with the assistance of a domestic violence program due to continuing abuse by the petitioner upon her. Nevertheless, the petitioner filed a Temporary Protective Order, which was granted and awarded him custody of the parties infant child. My client was already out of the state (with the child) and once she was served with the Order did appear for the Final Protective Order Hearing. Once the Petitioner put on his case, the evidence in my opinion, was abundantly clear that even in the light most favorable to the petitioner, that there had been at most a mutual scuffle which was instigated by the petitioner and that petitioner’s only motivation in filing the protective order was to obtain custody of the child. This is a complete misuse of the domestic violence statute, i.e. protective order statute. At the conclusion of the petitioner’s case I made a Motion to Dismiss the Petitioner’s Protective Order as he had not met his burden of proof establishing by clear and convincing evidence that abuse had occurred. The Court agreed that even in the light most favorable to the petitioner, he had not met his burden and dismissed the Protective Order without the need for my client to put on her case. In this particular situation, the Court was keenly aware of the purpose and intent of the domestic violence statute and did not grant the Final Order.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Contact Information