Podcast Summary
High earners in long-term marriages face challenges terminating spousal and child support obligations: High earners in long-term marriages may face legal complexities and lengthy processes when attempting to terminate spousal and child support obligations, even if the marriage has ended and significant disabilities are involved.
High earners in long-term marriages with significant spousal and child support obligations may face challenges in attempting to terminate those obligations prematurely. In the case of Cohen v Cohen, the husband, Richard, sought to terminate spousal support just three years after the judgment was established in a long-term marriage with four children with significant disabilities. Despite his attempts to terminate, the court denied his request twice, and he appealed the decision. This case highlights the importance of understanding the legal complexities surrounding spousal and child support obligations, particularly for high earners in long-term marriages. It also underscores the potential challenges and lengthy legal processes that may arise when seeking to modify or terminate such obligations.
Neglecting child support payments can lead to severe financial consequences: Child support arrears can't be discharged in bankruptcy and will continue to accumulate, potentially leading to significant financial penalties and trials for spousal support.
Neglecting child support payments can lead to significant financial consequences. In the discussed case, an individual named Richard accrued over $500,000 in arrears, and despite reaching a stipulation to decrease his child support payments, he still faced a trial for spousal support and the interest on his arrears. It's important to address these issues in a timely manner, as they can't be discharged in bankruptcy and will continue to accumulate. The case also highlights the role of commissioners like Commissioner Vogel, who have extensive experience in family law and can provide valuable insights during trials.
Richard's Motion to Reduce Support and Laura Lynn's Opposition: During a divorce proceeding, Richard sought to reduce child support and terminate spousal support based on income change, but Laura Lynn opposed using the disentitlement doctrine due to Richard's past delinquency. The court ultimately ruled on the spousal support issue, reducing it to $8,000 and determining arrears.
During a divorce proceeding in February 2019, Richard filed a motion to reduce child support and terminate spousal support based on a change in income. However, Laura Lynn opposed the motion under the disentitlement doctrine due to Richard's past delinquency in paying spousal and child support. The case was initially heard by a private judge, Commissioner Vogel, who made a tentative decision to reduce spousal support to $10,000. But before this decision could be finalized, Richard filed another motion in March 2019, stating his income had decreased significantly. The final decision, issued in April 2019, reduced spousal support to $8,000 and determined arrears for October 2018. Despite the complexity of the proceedings and the quick succession of motions, it appears that the court ultimately made rulings on the spousal support issue.
Manipulating reported income during divorce: A spouse cannot manipulate their income to avoid paying spousal support, especially if they had the ability to pay previously. Inconsistent income reports and attempts to terminate support before a final ruling can lead to complications and accountability for past income.
During a divorce proceeding, a spouse cannot manipulate their reported income to avoid paying spousal support, especially if they had the ability to pay during previous months but chose not to. In this case, a husband's inconsistent income reports and attempts to terminate support before a final ruling led to complications. The wife argued that the husband's disentitlement to support due to his willful disobedience, but the husband claimed an inability to pay. The court, however, held the husband accountable for his past income and ordered him to provide evidence of his financial situation. The husband's conflicting income declarations, along with his previous failure to pay, were key factors in the court's decision.
Person's inconsistent income declarations and non-payment of child and spousal support lead to denial of modification request: A person's past failure to pay child and spousal support as ordered and inconsistent income declarations can prevent them from modifying their support payments in the future.
The court dismissed a request for an evidentiary hearing and denied a motion to dismiss due to a person's inconsistent income declarations and intentional non-payment of child and spousal support. The court found that the person had the ability to pay but chose not to, and set a requirement for them to be current in their payments before filing a future modification request. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's decision, noting that it was not appropriate to prejudge future abilities to pay and intentions. However, the person's non-compliance with current support obligations resulted in no change to their support payments for the time being.
Impact of disentitlement doctrine on support modifications: Clients with outstanding arrears may face a challenge in seeking downward modifications of support obligations due to the disentitlement doctrine. Making payments and demonstrating good faith efforts can increase chances of favorable rulings.
The disentitlement doctrine, although not a new concept, can significantly impact a client's ability to seek a downward modification of their support obligations if they have outstanding arrears. The recent court of appeal case discussed in the podcast serves as a reminder for attorneys to prepare their clients for this potential outcome and encourage them to make payments, even if not the full amount, before seeking modification. The court's discretion to apply the doctrine on a case-by-case basis means that it cannot be used as a blanket preclusion, but rather a last resort. By making payments and demonstrating a good faith effort, clients may increase their chances of receiving a favorable ruling from the court.
Requesting Evidentiary Hearings in Family Law Cases: Be proactive and clear when requesting evidentiary hearings in family law cases, specifically requesting a hearing can prevent forfeiting the right to one, and be aware of Family Code Section 217 rules and the disentitlement doctrine when doing so.
Attorneys need to be proactive and clear when requesting evidentiary hearings in family law cases. The court of appeals in the discussed case emphasized that failure to specifically request a hearing could result in forfeiting the right to one. Moreover, the disentitlement doctrine, which can be used to deny support modifications based on a parent's past behavior, requires a nuanced and thoughtful approach. The case also highlights the importance of being aware of Family Code Section 217 rules when requesting an evidentiary hearing. In a long cause matter dealing with arrears and ability to pay, it is crucial to remember the fairness to the court and ensure that all necessary preparations are made for the hearing.
The Importance of Truthful and Accurate Income and Expense Declarations in Legal Proceedings: Being truthful and accurate in income and expense declarations is crucial in legal proceedings to avoid negative consequences such as disentitlement doctrine, wage garnishments, bank levies, and attorney fees. Attorneys use these declarations to cross-examine and ensure a fair resolution.
Being truthful and accurate in income and expense declarations is crucial in legal proceedings, especially when dealing with arrears. The declarations serve as a tool for attorneys to cross-examine and uncover potential dishonesty. Failing to provide accurate information can lead to negative consequences, such as disentitlement doctrine, wage garnishments, bank levies, and attorney fees. It's essential for law firms to ensure their clients understand the importance of these declarations and to review them carefully before submission. Additionally, attorneys can use various methods, including wage garnishments, bank levies, and sending letters, to recover arrears for their clients. Overall, accuracy and transparency in income and expense declarations are essential to prevent potential legal issues and ensure a fair resolution.
Protecting vulnerable parties from harm: Judges have the power to use sanctions to protect vulnerable parties, ensuring justice is served while holding individuals accountable for their actions.
While the disentitlement doctrine is a well-known tool for sanctions in legal proceedings, it's important to remember that there are other options available. The recent case discussed highlights the use of sanctions to protect vulnerable parties, such as children with special needs, from harm. This serves as a reminder that judges have the power to hold individuals accountable for their actions and ensure that justice is served. It's crucial that these sanctions are applied appropriately and not misused. The case also underscores the importance of awareness and education regarding the various tools available for sanctions, and the potential impact they can have on individuals and society as a whole.