Month: March 2023

Lottery and Divorce

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The interplay of winning the lottery and divorce is in the news. That’s because of an interesting new report out of Sweden that is showing married women who win the lottery are more likely to divorce than men who win the lottery.

Divorce Lottery

The Big Payout

The Swedish study, titled “Fortunate Families? The effects of wealth on marriage and fertility”, tried to analyze the short term effects of large, positive wealth shocks on marriage and fertility in a sample of Swedish lottery players up to 10 years after a lottery windfall.

Researchers found that married women who win the lottery are almost twice as likely as married men to file for a divorce in the aftermath of a win compared to male lottery winners.

“When the winning player is a married woman, our estimates suggest that a 1 million-Swedish krona windfall almost doubles the base-line short-run divorce rate”

The study made a point of noting that winning the lottery as a woman doesn’t cause more divorces — it simply accelerates them for women whose dissolution was already underway. The authors also show this divorce effect after women win the lottery fades away in the long-run.

Florida Lottery and Divorce

But how are lottery winnings distributed in a divorce? I have written about equitable distribution in Florida before. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, in addition to all other remedies available to a court to do equity between the parties, a court must set apart to each spouse that spouse’s non-marital assets and liabilities.

However, when distributing the marital assets between spouses, a family court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors.

In Florida, nonmarital assets which are not divided include things such as assets acquired before the marriage; assets you acquired separately by non-interspousal gift, and assets excluded as marital in a valid written agreement. Conversely, marital assets which are subject to division generally include things like assets and liabilities acquired during the marriage and the enhancement in value of some nonmarital assets.

Florida is an equitable distribution state, and all assets acquired during the marriage are considered marital property. So, if a spouse wins the lottery while still married to the other, it is generally going to be considered marital property and split equitably in the event of a divorce.

However, this does not mean that the winnings must be split equally. The lottery winnings should be factored into the entire equitable distribution scheme. After adding the lottery millions to the equation, a court can look at the marital debts and take into consideration if the lucky spouse who won the lottery has a gambling addiction and accrued massive debts.

Powerball

Men who win the lottery actually have higher marriage rates, and a reduced divorce risk suggesting, surprisingly, that wealth actually increases men’s attractiveness! According to Swedish researchers:

“Long-term divorce risk goes down when husbands win the lottery.”

In fact, a lottery win for men increases the chance of unmarried men getting married in the five years after they win by 30 percent, while the chances of married men getting divorced is reduced by 40 percent.

There is an impact on fertility by winning the lottery too. The study found that, not only are male winners much more likely to get or stay married, they also end up having more children. This trend in the fertility of lottery winners was consistent regardless of whether the man was married or not.

Apparently, the Swedish study concluded wealth actually makes men seem more appealing to current prospective partners and gives women lottery winners an early out from unsatisfactory relationships.

These results are compatible with previous empirical evidence showing that a higher husband’s income or employment stabilizes marriages, while an increase in wives’ income or employment has the opposite effect.

The Guardian article is here.

 

Changing Property Division Law in the UK

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

With the Florida legislative season underway, it is important to keep an eye on what other legislatures are doing for family law. This is especially true with news that the UK is set to explore changing the law of property division during a divorce in England and Wales.

Property Division Law

A spanner in the works

The current property division law in the United Kingdom, the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, has recently been criticized by people as being uncertain and unpredictable. Many argue spouses are left to turning to costly litigation due to a lack of clear guidance on how wealth should be divided.

The Law Commission, the independent agency which reviews legislation, may examine whether the act needs updating with further announcements expected “very soon”.

London has developed a reputation as a magnet for wealthy couples seeking a divorce in recent decades because of the generosity of financial awards given to ex-wives by the courts in the capital.

The English legal system tends to split the combined wealth of divorcing spouses equally even if one partner is the breadwinner. This is similar to the United States, but is in contrast to many European countries, where financial awards are far less generous and maintenance is only given for a limited number of years.

Under the current law, spouses who go to court can spend thousands on legal fees because legal aid is no longer available for most types of family law, and the drawn-out court battles can be detrimental to children.

Florida Property Division

I’ve written about the subject of property division in Florida many times before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by Florida Statutes as interpreted by case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their nonmarital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties. In dividing the marital assets and debts though, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal. However, if there is a justification for an unequal distribution, the court has the authority to award an unequal distribution of marital assets.

However, the court must base an unequal distribution on certain factors, including: the contribution to the marriage by each spouse; the economic circumstances of the parties, the duration of the marriage, or any interrupting of personal careers or education.

It has been a long-standing rule in Florida that an unequal distribution of marital assets may be justified to compensate for things such as a spouse’s intentional dissipation, waste, depletion or destruction of marital assets.

Parliamentary Chinwag

The status of prenuptial agreements in the UK may also be considered. Prenuptial agreements in the UK are legal documents specifying how assets are to be divided when the marriage ends. Prenuptial agreements are now recognized by UK courts following a seminal 2010 Supreme Court involving a German paper industry heiress.

But legal experts believe prenuptial agreements in the UK should be put on to a more formal, statutory footing and enshrined in law. Others complain the legislation, which has been subsequently developed by judge-made case law, allows judges to use their discretion to assess each case and make different awards, creating uncertainty.

Judges have flexibility when it comes to allocating settlements but the variation in judgment, said lawyers, made it difficult to advise clients about the likely outcome of their case.

Critics of the current property division system believe obscurities in the legislation should be tackled. Lawyers highlighted regional variations in how divorces are settled. Many critics complain that London courts tend to award more generously, while many courts outside the capital prefer to give “time-limited” maintenance to financially weaker spouses.

Some argue that the law also fails to reflect the way British society has changed in the past 50 years — with women more financially independent and with dual earning couples becoming the norm.

The Financial Times article is here.

Calling a Stepparent Dad

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

An important aspect of child custody arises when families reorganize, and whether it is okay for a child to start calling a stepparent “dad” and “mom”. In a recent Pennsylvania case the issue was whether a family judge can order the Child to only call her biological parents “Dad” and “Mom”.

Stepparent Name

Name Calling

A Mother and Father were married in 2012, welcomed their first and only child O.K. in 2013, and then separated five years later. Mother was a client assistant and later a stay-at-home Mom. She re-married her new husband, (the Stepfather), with whom she has two children.

In 2018, the couple agreed to a week-on/week-off shared custody schedule that continued until 2020, when the family court reduced the Father’s timesharing to the first, second, and fourth full weekends of each month during the school year.

In 2021 the Father tried to modify custody and return to a week-on/week-off shared physical custody schedule and sole legal custody as to educational decision-making.

At the modification trial, the Mother testified to having the Child baptized without notifying Father and contrary to his known wishes, and that she would not discourage the Child from calling Stepfather “dad” or “daddy”. The family judge found Mother’s actions were part of a pattern of to diminish Father’s place and authority in the Child’s life.

The family judge modified custody and returned the parties to a week-on/week-off physical custody schedule, denied the Father’s request for sole legal custody concerning educational decision-making, and importantly, held the Mother in contempt.

Mother moved to reconsider, asking the court to vacate the provisions compelling co-parent counseling and requiring the parties to correct the Child’s use of names like “Mom” and “Dad” for the parties’ significant others.

The trial court then granted Father limited sole legal custody to make medical decisions as to whether the Child receives the COVID-19 vaccination and any subsequent boosters of that vaccine and denied Mother’s emergency motion for reconsideration and injunctive relief. The Mother appealed.

Florida Parental Responsibility and Stepparents

I’ve written about parental responsibility in Florida before. In Florida, “custody” is a concept we have done away with. Florida uses the parental responsibility concept. Generally, shared parental responsibility is a relationship ordered by a court in which both parents retain their full parental rights and responsibilities.

Under shared parental responsibility, parents are required to confer with each other and jointly make major decisions affecting the welfare of their child. In Florida, shared parental responsibility is the preferred relationship between parents when a marriage or a relationship ends. In fact, courts are instructed to order parents to share parental responsibility of a child unless it would be detrimental to the child.

At the trial, the test applied is the best interests of the child. Determining the best interests of a child is no longer entirely subjective. Instead, the decision is based on an evaluation of certain factors affecting the welfare and interests of the child and the circumstances of the child’s family.

A stepparent does not acquire all of the rights or assume all of the obligations of a child’s natural parent in Florida. Stepparents have the difficult task of raising a child that is not biologically or legally their own. Sometimes, stepparents are responsible for providing love, financial support, and supervision when there is an absentee natural parent. When a stepparent remarries and wants to have legal rights in connection with the spouse’s child, adoption is the right path.

The Constitution and Names

On appeal, the Mother argued it was wrong to restrict the child to referring only to her biological parents and “dad” or “mom” in that it violated the Child’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

In custody matters, the paramount concern is the best interest of the child involved. However, in cases raising First Amendment issues, a court has to examine the  record to make sure the judgment does not violate free expression.

Generally, content-based restrictions on speech are presumptively unconstitutional and are subject to strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny requires the government to prove the restrictions are narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.

While a state has an interest in protecting the physical and mental health of a child, that interest is not triggered unless a court finds that the restricted speech caused or will cause harm to a child’s welfare.

The family judge ordered:

“The parties shall not encourage the Child to refer to anyone other than the parties as Mother, Mom, Father, Dad, [et cetera.] In the event the Child refers to a party’s spouse or significant other in such a way, that party shall correct the Child.”

The court restricted the Child’s use of the terms “Mom,” “Dad,” to the Child’s biological parents. Accordingly, the order was a content-based restriction subject to strict scrutiny.

Father testified that the Child is calling Stepfather “Dad” or “Daddy,” a term that applied only to Father during the Child’s first five years of life – years during which Father testified he was the Child’s “stay-at-home Dad.”

Mother testified that it is “unreasonable” to expect the Child, at age 8, to call Stepfather by a name different from what her two younger half-siblings will use in the future.

The court held it was unreasonable for Mother to expect that Father share the title “Dad” with Stepfather, in light of evidence that Mother has acted to diminish Father’s role in the Child’s life, such as leaving him in the dark regarding a baptism.

The family judge’s imposing a restriction on the Child’s speech, did so in an attempt to further the state interest in protecting the Child’s mental and psychological well-being by maintaining and strengthening the strained relationship between Child and Father.

However, the restrictions were not narrowly tailored to further the state’s compelling interest without a finding by that the use of the term “Dad” or “Daddy” to refer to Stepfather caused harm or will cause harm to the Child.

Indeed, the text of the trial court’s order suggests that the trial court was concerned that the parents’ mutual ill-will and mistrust may have cultivated unhealthy bonds between the parents and the Child, not that the terms the Child used to refer to her parents and stepparents were central to that process.

Without a finding that the Child’s use of the terms “Dad” and “Daddy” to refer to Stepfather posed a tangible risk of harm to the Child, the appellate court was constrained to vacate the content-based restriction.

The opinion is here.

The Importance of Divorce Jurisdiction

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The jurisdiction where you file your divorce can be of extreme importance. File in the wrong jurisdiction, and your divorce can be deemed a nullity. In Afghanistan, where divorce is taboo, the Taliban have started to void divorce judgments granted under the previous government.

Divorce Jurisdiction

Trouble in Kabul

Reports from Afghanistan are flowing in about women, who were abused for years by their ex-husbands, who have now had to go into hiding with their children after the Taliban tore up their divorce decrees.

A small number of women, under the previous US-backed government, were granted a legal separation in Afghanistan. However, when Taliban forces swept into power in 2021, husbands claimed they had been forced into divorce and the Taliban are ordering women back to their husbands.

“My daughters and I cried a lot that day. I said to myself, ‘Oh God, the devil has returned.”

The Taliban government, which imposes strict Islamic law, has placed severe restrictions on women’s lives that some have called “gender-based apartheid”. Afghan women have been denied education, restrictions on movement, and a lack of participation in the economy.

Importantly, lawyers say that several women have reported being dragged back into abusive marriages after Taliban commanders voided their divorce judgments.

Florida Divorce Jurisdiction

I have written about jurisdiction in Florida divorce cases before. In Florida, there is no common law right to a divorce. Divorce in Florida is formally called a “dissolution of marriage”, and the cause of action for dissolution of marriage is entirely dependent on Florida Statutes.

The only true jurisdictional requirement imposed by statute in Florida is to show that one of the parties to the marriage has resided six months in the state of Florida before the filing of the petition for dissolution of marriage.

The importance of meeting the statutory requirement is important as it allows you to obtain recognition of your divorce judgment in other states under the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution.

Although Florida’s residency requirement sounds simple enough, it is a jurisdictional requirement which must be alleged and proved in every case. Failure to do so, renders your divorce null and void.

Bad News in Kunduz

According to the UN’s mission in Afghanistan, nine in ten women will experience physical, sexual or psychological violence from their partner. However, divorce is considered more taboo than domestic violence is in Afghanistan. Worse, the culture remains unforgiving to women who part with their husbands.

Under the previous US-backed government, divorce rates were steadily rising in some cities, where the small gains in women’s rights were largely limited to education and employment.
As awareness grew, women realized that separating from abusive husbands was possible.

Under the US-backed regime, special family courts with women judges and lawyers were established to hear such cases, but the Taliban authorities have made their new justice system an all-male affair.

Divorces under the new Taliban government are limited to when a husband was a classified drug addict or has left the country. In cases of domestic violence, or when a husband does not agree to a divorce, divorce is not permitted.

Child marriages are also an ongoing phenomenon in Afghanistan. In one case, Sana was 15 when she married her cousin who was 10 years older than her. With the help of a free legal service project Sana won a divorce from her husband in court — but her relief was shattered when Taliban commanders came knocking.

Threatened with losing custody of her four daughters, she returned to her ex-husband who by then had also married another woman. She escaped after he announced the engagement of her daughters to Taliban members.

The oppressive measures against women in Afghanistan are aggravating the economic woes of the country. A report by the International Crisis Group states that many western countries, and even private donors, have canceled donations fearing backlash from funding such an oppressive regime.

India’s NDTV article is here.