Divorce

Notice of Relocation – One More Thing That Can Make Moving Difficult

April 16, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

As if packing your entire home into cardboard boxes, finding a new place to live and work, and saying goodbye to local friends and family aren’t enough, we have one more thing you may need to consider before moving. If you have children that you intend to also relocate, with someone whom you are not moving with, you may need to provide your kids’ other parent (and/or anyone else with legal rights to residential time with your children) with notice of your intent to relocate. (This may not be true if there is no court order providing the other person(s) with legal rights to time with the children, but there are other laws that may still affect your ability to move with your kids.)

The content and type of notice required varies based on where you intend to relocate to and whether there is a court order requiring notice.

If, based on your circumstances, notice is required pursuant to RCW 26.09.430, it should be provided no less than sixty days prior to your move. (As with most rules, there are exceptions to this rule.) If the general rule applies and sixty days’ notice is to be provided, the opposing party must file their objection within thirty days of receiving notice of your intent to relocate. If they do object, the court (unless you can settle the issue before hand) will decide whether or not you may move with your children.

Legal Separation: Four Things You Should Know

April 10, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

In Washington, instead of filing for dissolution of marriage, a spouse may request what is called a legal separation. People, are often confused about what this means. This is probably partially because the term “legal separation” or “separated” is used in different ways in family law. First, the term is used to define the period of time between when the marriage becomes defunct, and when the parties are finally divorced. Second, there is the legal process to obtain what is called a legal separation. This blog post intends to speak about the latter meaning of the term. Below please find a list of things you may want to know about legal separation:

Legal Separation as defined by RCW 26.09.030 is not a necessary part of the dissolution process (though it can be part of the process). Instead, it is a separate process that can be used to achieve somewhat different (though overlapping) relief.
With a legal separation spouses can obtain a parenting plan, a division of debts and liabilities, spousal maintenance, a child support order, and more.
If a spouse files a petition for legal separation, and changes their mind and wants a divorce, that person may have to file a second petition (this time for dissolution of marriage) requesting that the court dissolve their marriage.
Six months after a decree of legal separation has been filed, the decree may be converted to a decree of dissolution by either party (without the other party’s consent).
Unless a spouse takes further action (see above), the marriage will not be dissolved at the end of the legal separation process.

If you have questions about legal separation, please schedule an appointment with a Seattle family lawyer.

Parenting Plans in Practice

April 8, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

Recently, in the family law community a discussion was had regarding how strictly parenting plans are followed by our clients. While the question was batted around for a while with anecdotal stories of perfect compliance and/or utter disregard of the plans, the answer was less than conclusive. That is: it depends. The level of compliance with a parenting plan seems to vary as much as the families they are drafted for.

While the question couldn’t be answered conclusively, some generalizations could be drawn from the anecdotes. From this (entirely unscientific) exercise, it became clear that what we have seen from parents is similar to what other family law practitioners are seeing. Some families follow their parenting plan to a T, while others toss it in a drawer and all but forget it ever existed. One commonality that seems to exist is that if parents got along well regarding parenting during the marriage they are more likely to be flexible and understanding with each other regarding the parenting after the divorce. Another similar observation is that parties who experienced long, contentious litigation were often less likely to be flexible regarding aspects of their parenting plans. Another shared experience, is having clients who begin as a flexible agreeable partnership, and then change to a less-agreeable, more rigid pair of individuals.

Whether you anticipate strict compliance or a laissez-faire attitude toward your plan, it is important that it be drafted in a way that you would be satisfied if strict compliance was required. Even in dissolutions where both parties anticipate flexibility and friendliness, a well drafted and reasonably specific plan is an absolute necessity (this plan can even explicitly permit flexibility). Sometimes, having a specific framework helps people maintain order and efficiency. It’s not that they won’t stray from the plan occasionally, just that when they do, they’ll have a framework to return to. Also, sometimes relationships sour (those who have been divorced know this all too well). Even if things seem copacetic during drafting, plan for the worst. Have a plan in place that you and your kids will be happy sticking too if your flexible relationship fails to remain so.

More on Real Estate and Divorce

April 2, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

In most divorces, property has to be divided. Oftentimes, a divorcing couple’s most valuable asset (or greatest liability) is their real property (i.e. their house). As such, special attention must be paid to this property both during and after dissolution of a marriage. The New York Times recently ran an article about real estate agents who have found a niche helping people that have recently divorced (or are in the process of divorcing) market their real property. The article provides useful tips for parties in this situation.

The article is also of interest for its proposition regarding families choosing to live close together after divorce to make co-parenting easier. In our experience, for families that have decent communication skills and can tolerate being around each other, this can be a good option. It allows frequent visitation with each parent, allows both parents to attend the child(ren)’s events, and minimizes transportation time for the kids.

Read the article here.

RCW 26.19.071: The Standards for Determination of Income for Child Support Purposes

March 30, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

When deciding the appropriate level of child support, the court has to determine the income of both parties involved (i.e. the parents). The determination of income (what’s included and what isn’t) is often the most important financial finding a court makes during an action involving child support. It has a lasting impact on both the obligor (paying spouse) and the obligee (receiving spouse).

It is important that you have competent and thorough counsel on your side when this determination is being made.

Some of the highlights of RCW 26.19.071 are provided below:

No Fault Divorce

March 24, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

Washington is a no-fault-divorce state. This means that assigning blame, and/or proving that one spouse or the other is at fault for the marriage failing, is not necessary. This comes as a surprise to some people who come into our office to consult regarding the end of their marriage. Some are disappointed to learn that their spouse is not going to be punished by the court for his or her marriage-ending behavior. While we empathize with the hurt and sense of injustice our clients feel, we maintain our focus on the issues that will matter most in our clients’ cases.

Instead of requiring that one party be ordered at fault, in our state it is only required that one spouse state that the marriage is irretrievably broken, and ask the court to dissolve the union.

There are limited circumstances when the court will want to know about the behavior of one or both of the spouses that led to the failure of the marriage. For example, if the failure was due to domestic violence the court will do what it can to protect the victim and/or any children involved. Or, if the failure was due to a wasting of financial resources by one spouse, the court may want to consider this when determining whether to enter temporary orders restricting use of community financial resources. In other words, behavior during marriage is not irrelevant to the divorce process, but it is also not necessarily determinative of the outcome.

Name Change at Time of Divorce

March 6, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

As part of a petition for dissolution of marriage, a petitioner may ask that the court order that his or her name be changed. In many cases, this request is made by a woman asking that her name be restored to her pre-marriage name. For some, especially those without children and those dissolving a marriage that is shorter in duration, the decision is easy. They have left the marriage and would like a fresh start without a constant reminder of their now-ending marriage.

In other cases, especially after longer marriages and those involving children, the decision is more difficult. Some people have built a professional reputation with their married name and have to consider how a name change may affect their professional life. Furthermore, if you share your name with your children, there are more issues a parent must consider. The child and/or parent may feel that the continuation of the shared name provides some sense of stability in an otherwise rapidly changing set of circumstances.

In addition to concerns about professional reputation and children, many clients also choose to keep their married name because they don’t want to go through the hassle of changing their name. In addition to the court ordering (via the decree) that your name be changed, there are additional steps. A person must change their name with the Department of Licensing, the Social Security Administration, their financial institutions, etc. It can be a time-consuming process.

Three Alternatives to Court

February 24, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

Often, when a person comes into our office they assume that every family law dispute ends up with a judge handing down a verdict, after a public hearing. In family law, most of our cases involve some of our clients’ most intimate personal and financial concerns. As such, in most cases, our clients would prefer their case not be decided in the courtroom. There are many reasons for this: a client may have personal or financial privacy concerns; a client may be intimidated by the formal atmosphere of the courthouse; or a client may be afraid of having someone who knows very little about them and their children making a decision with such lasting implications. Fortunately for clients hoping to avoid court, there are other options.

One alternative to court is to make an agreement between parties and their attorneys. There is nothing (in the vast majority of cases) prohibiting parties from coming to an agreement on a previously disputed issue. Attorneys can draft the agreement into legally binding language, and have the new agreed order entered with the court. If the parties communicate well, and are not too far apart on the disputed issue, this can often be the most efficient option. It allows parties to keep private information private, and saves the cost of hiring a mediator or arbitrator.

Another alternative to court is mediation. In mediation, a trained (usually paid) mediator facilitates communication and assists parties in crafting a mutually agreeable resolution. The mediator does not hand down a decision, but instead facilitates and encourages the parties to create one themselves. If a resolution is reached, the mediator and/or the attorneys will draft the agreement into legally binding language. Mediation offers privacy (it is [with limited exceptions] a confidential process) and personalized results (as it is the parties themselves who decide the outcome).

Extending the Waiting Period

February 16, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

The current RCW 26.09.030 requires that parties wait until ninety days after the filing of a petition before a decree of dissolution can be entered. There is a bill currently under consideration in the state Senate, seeking to change the waiting period from ninety days to one year. According to this Seattle Times article, the bill was heard by the Senate on Friday. Another provision of the bill would require that court-issued divorce handbooks be modified to include the benefits of reconciliation. Supporters, according to the Times article, believe that extending the waiting period could result in more reconciliations and thus less divorces. Opponents, again according to the Times, claim that the law is paternalistic.

In our experience, by the time people are ready to file for divorce their minds and hearts have been through a thoughtful and lengthy decision making process. While it is difficult, they have decided that ending their marriage is the best next step. Requiring that it take longer to take the next step is unduly stalling their lives, and the lives of their children.

Discover the Possibilities: The Basics of the Discovery Process

February 10, 2013 | by Blair & Kim, PLLC

Once a family law action is filed with the court, some clients are surprised to learn that they have the ability to obtain information from the other party, and even third parties, which is otherwise difficult or impossible to obtain. Other clients are surprised when they receive a hefty document containing hundreds of questions that have to be answered within a limited time period. Whether you are the purveyor or receiver of discovery documents, it is helpful for people to understand some basics about the discovery process.

In general, the discovery process is the process by which parties “discover” information relevant to their case. There are several options parties may use. Below is a list of four commonly used discovery methods and a brief definition of each:

Interrogatories: Interrogatories are questions directed to the other party. In family law cases, they often include questions regarding property, parenting, income, expenses, and anything else relevant to the case. The receiving party is required to respond to the questions within a limited period of time (usually thirty days).
Requests for Production: As may be obvious from the name, these are requests for the production of documents or other items currently held in the possession (or accessible to) the other party. This may include bank statements, other financial documents, appraisal documents, diaries, journals, student grades, resumes and more. The requests for production often come in a document along with the interrogatories and have the same time limits.
Subpoenas: Subpoenas are documents that order a person to appear, permit inspection, or produce documents. These can be served on both parties to the suit, and third parties. For example, if the opposing party holds an interest at a company, a party may request that the records custodian of that company provide the records s/he keeps. Or, a subpoena may order that a person appear for a deposition.
Oral Depositions: Oral depositions are an opportunity for a party to case to ask questions of another party, or a non-party. These depositions may be used to find out what relevant information a person has or doesn’t have. It may also be used to determine how a witness might testify if the case goes to trial.

In each case, the benefit of different methods of discovery must be balanced with the cost and time expended on obtaining it. We are experienced in determining a discovery strategy that properly balances these often conflicting interests.