Month: September 2025

Comity and International Divorce

A foreign couple that married and lived in Indiana received an international divorce from their home country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. After they returned to the U.S., the Wife filed for divorce a second time in Indiana. An appellate court in Indiana now has to determine if the one divorce is enough for a couple.

Comity Property

Comity of Errors

In the Indiana case, the Husband and Wife are citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a country on the Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe. The country is home to medieval villages and the Ottoman-era bridge where Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated, igniting World War I.

In 2017, the couple were married in Indianapolis, where they both lived. In 2022, after the couple returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina, they jointly filed a petition to dissolve their marriage in a court in Tuzla, a small town in the north of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Their divorce petition did not mention they owned marital property in Indiana. The Bosnian court granted them a dissolution of their marriage, returning them to being single.

But then on 2023, the Wife filed a new petition for dissolution of marriage, this time in and Indiana Superior Court requesting the court to divide their real estate in Indiana. The Husband moved the court in Indiana to dismiss the case under principles of comity, citing the Bosnian proceeding which had already dissolved their marriage.

The trial court granted Husband’s motion to dismiss because of the previous divorce in Bosnia and Herzegovina. But then the trial court reversed itself, and granted the Wife’s Motion to Correct Errors, finding that the foreign final judgment did not address the couple’s property in Indiana.

Florida Comity

I have written about comity and international divorce before. As a general rule, the final judgments of courts in foreign countries are subject to recognition and enforcement in this country.

Any foreign divorce decree should be recognized in Florida as a valid judgment, and should be entitled to comity, where the parties have been given notice and the opportunity to be heard, where the foreign court had original jurisdiction and where the foreign decree does not offend the public policy of the State of Florida.

Comity does not require Florida public policy to be supplanted by foreign law. That’s because comity is not technically a law, but a practice for convenience and expediency. If it would be contrary to Florida law or contravene some established and important Florida policy, comity would not be applied. So, before enforcing a foreign judgment, a Florida court has to review the foreign judgment to make sure it complies with the rule of comity.

Additionally, foreign courts generally do not have the jurisdiction to decide issues relating to real property located in Florida. Accordingly, Florida courts have consistently held that foreign judgments affecting Florida real property are not entitled to comity or enforcement.

Comity Genius

Back in Indiana, the Husband argued res judicata prevented the Wife from filing a divorce petition in Indiana after receiving a divorce in Bosnia. The Wife countered that res judicata did not apply because the Bosnian judgment was not rendered on the merits regarding the marital property located in Indiana.

The appellate court agreed. While the Bosnian court dissolved the parties’ marriage, it is undisputed that it did not address the division of marital property in Indiana. As such, res judicata did not apply.

Next, the Husband argued the trial court erred in declining to dismiss the case under principles of comity. Comity was found to be important in avoiding conflicting results and in discouraging repeated litigation of the same question.

Generally, where a divorce action concerns the same parties and the same subject matter, comity should require dismissing a subsequent divorce filed in a different jurisdiction. However, in the Indiana case there was no danger the parties would be subject to multiple or inconsistent judgments, since the real estate disposition was not at issue in the Bosnian proceeding.

The Indiana Appellate Court opinion is here.

Divorce Loans

Divorces are financially draining, often requiring you to deplete your savings or obtain loans during the process to cover lawyer fees, expert witness fees, and other costs. Whether a divorce loan is right for your divorce is making world news after a Chinese businesswoman sued her young employee after loaning him money for his divorce.

Divorce Loans

Big Trouble in Little China

A businesswoman named Zhu from Chongqing, a city located in south-western China, is counting her losses after giving a former employee she had an affair with Rs 3,000,000 (US$420,000) to fund his divorce and payoff his wife for child support.

The younger man, known as He, joined Zhu’s company while both were married to other people. Zhu quickly developed feelings for him and the two began an affair. They agreed to divorce their respective spouses and start afresh together.

To help her young lover divorce his wife, Chen, Zhu transferred three million renminbis directly to the wife as settlement. The sum was described as “compensation” for the divorce and as financial support for the upbringing of their child. With the money paid, He finalized his divorce and moved in with Zhu.

About a year after moving in together, Zhu and He decided they were incompatible, and separated. But then Zhu demanded her divorce loan back. Ultimately, Zhu filed a lawsuit against the now divorce coupled, He and Chen, and demanded they both repay her divorce loan to He.

Florida Divorce Loans

I have written about international divorces and marital debts before. In a dissolution of marriage, whether to classify loans as marital or nonmarital may depend on a few factors. For example, when was the loan given, what was its purpose, and were the purposes marital or nonmarital.

Generally, the cut-off date for determining whether a loan is marital or nonmarital is the date of the filing of the petition for dissolution of marriage, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Accordingly, any loans incurred before the filing date are presumed to be marital liabilities unless proven otherwise. However, loans incurred after the filing date are generally classified as nonmarital liabilities unless they meet specific criteria.

House of Flying Daggers

During the first trial, the court sided with Zhu, arguing that the funds violated public order and good customs, thus deeming it an “invalid gift.” Consequently, the court ruled that the money should be refunded.

The divorced couple, Chen and He, then filed an appeal. An upper-level court determined that Zhu had not provided sufficient evidence to prove that she had gifted the money to Chen. Instead, the money was classified as a payment made on behalf of He for divorce compensation and child-rearing expenses, stated the appellate court.

The appellate court said Zhu had failed to prove the payment was a personal gift to Chen. Instead, it was regarded as money He owed his wife as part of the divorce settlement and for child-rearing expenses.

The upper-level court also criticized Zhu’s conduct, observing that she had used her wealth to hasten a divorce, and then sought to undo her gift when the romance faltered. The judges noted her lack of integrity in attempting to reclaim the payment under such circumstances.

The South China Morning Post article is here.

Divorce, Custody, and Mortgages

A recent Wall Street Journal article discusses a growing problem. For many couples going through divorce, they bought their house and have a low-interest rate mortgage. Since they are separating, they now have to work out child custody.  So, how are divorcing couples managing in this current, high-interest-rate, high-rent market, and minimizing the disruption on their children?

Custody Nesting

The Good Old Days

You’re married, have children, and have a home with a mortgage. Lucky for you, you locked in your mortgage rate in 2021, when the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate dipped to an all-time low of 2.68 percent.

These days, the average interest rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage stands at 6.35 percent. As recently as January, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate exceeded 7 percent.

Each percentage point decrease in a mortgage rate can save thousands or tens of thousands in additional cost each year, depending on the price of the house. For any couple locked in at a historically low interest rate, how do you avoid selling the marital home in a down market when interest rates and the cost of ownership are substantially higher?

The Wall Street Journal recently explored a growing trend for parenting plans among divorcing couples: “nesting”. Nesting is a parenting plan in which children remain in the marital home while the parents timeshare in the marital home. Instead of forcing children to shuttle between two homes, the parents do the shuttling.

Florida Parenting Plans

I’ve written on Florida’s attempts to legislate the parenting plan concept before, including complex and international custody and other issues.

In Florida, a Parenting Plan is required in all cases involving time-sharing with minor children, even when timesharing is not in dispute.

A “Parenting plan” is a document created to govern the relationship between the parents relating to decisions that must be made regarding the minor child and must contain a time-sharing schedule for the parents and the child.

The issues concerning the minor child include the child’s home, education, health care, and physical, social, and emotional well-being. In creating the plan, all circumstances between the parents, including their historic relationship, domestic violence, and other factors are taken into consideration.

The Parenting Plan must be developed and agreed to by the parents and approved by the court. If the parties cannot agree to a Parenting Plan or if the parents agreed to a plan that is not approved by the court, a Parenting Plan will be established by the court with or without the use of parenting plan recommendations.

Bird Nesting

Every family situation in a divorce is different. Nesting may be an option to consider. Some parents rent a small studio or apartment near the marital home, keeping essentials like toiletries, chargers, and even spare glasses to reduce disruptions. The child usually stays only in the family home, not the secondary space.

Many families often reassess whether nesting still works, as it requires significant compromise and coordination. Divorce is already a compromise, and nesting adds more to that complexity. Lawyers note that a “fair” settlement often leaves both parties somewhat dissatisfied.

Selling the marital home may free up the equity in the home, but selling also forces both spouses into today’s high housing costs and high mortgage interest rates. A buyout requires refinancing, often at much higher interest rates. Renting an additional apartment adds to ongoing expenses, and is not cheap in Miami.

Some divorcing families prefer to keep their shared traditions, such as their weekly meals in the main house. Children sometimes frame the arrangement in positive terms, such as “camping out” with one parent. Still, blurred boundaries can create challenges for parents.

Nesting offers stability for children but comes at high emotional and financial costs for parents. It requires constant negotiation, limits your privacy from your ex-spouse, and still brings extra housing expense. For some divorcing couples, nesting is a transitional and temporary arrangement. For other couples, nesting lasts years – provided both parents can tolerate the compromises.

The Wall Street Journal article is here (paywall).