Category: Domestic Violence

New Domestic Violence Law & Does Margarine Cause Divorce?

Posted by admin on

On behalf of Ronald H. Kauffman, P.A. posted in Domestic Violence on Friday, May 16, 2014.

Few people realize that the first hearing for a divorce injunction is ex parte – meaning the other side doesn’t show up or even know about it. In ex parte hearings, you can’t introduce evidence other than sworn pleadings and affidavits. A new law changes that.

The latest legislative session ended, and Governor Scott signed many bills into law. As part of the flock of bills flying out of Tallahassee, a new bill amends Florida law to allow courts in domestic violence cases to take judicial notice of court records when imminent danger is alleged.

Ordinarily, the Due Process clause of the Constitution protects litigants in ex parte hearings, limiting the kind of evidence a party can try to admit without them knowing.

This new bill, which became law this week, provides a waiver to the Due Process requirements for the admissibility of evidence at ex parte temporary injunction hearings.

The Senate bill can be read here.

***

Is there a link between eating margarine and the divorce rate?

Florida is a No-Fault Divorce state, so it doesn’t much matter the cause of a divorce. But, have you ever wondered why people get a divorce? I’ve blogged about this topic before. For instance, could divorce rates be linked to other variables?

There could be a correlation, but proving a mere correlation between things does not mean that one causes the other. Just because there is snow outside your window in the morning doesn’t mean sleeping causes snow. Some events are just coincidences, or in statistic-speak, “spurious correlations.”

A spurious correlation occurs when two things appear related, but in reality are not. For the statistically inclined, Tyler Vigen has assembled a few funny charts of spurious correlations. I’ve copied a funny chart showing the rates of divorce and margarine consumption.

More of these funny correlations are available at Tyler Vigen’s website.

Are the ashes from a cremation marital property?

Posted by admin on

On behalf of Ronald H. Kauffman, P.A. posted in Equitable Distribution on Monday, January 27, 2014.

Dividing up of assets and liabilities in a divorce does not always mean money, houses, and credit cards. divorced can involve surprising things like breast augmentation, and very sad things like the remains of a stillborn fetus. And that’s exactly the asset a court in Albany, New York had to divide. Should the court’s decision be based on equitable distribution theory or on a Roe v. Wade woman’s right to choose?

In Jackson v. Jackson, the “property” was a stillborn fetus that was miscarried at 26 weeks. The parties separated a few months later. The wife testified during separation, the husband threatened to flush the ashes down a toilet. He testified he had a bad year, and made the comment in anger.

New York law provides that a fetal death is defined as death prior to the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a product of conception.

Do the ashes of a stillborn fetus conceived and miscarried during the marriage constitute marital or separate property? Like Florida, New York defines marital property as property acquired during the marriage.

Ashes are clearly marital property because there is no other alternative. However, the Wife owned the eggs from which the fetus developed before the marriage. The Husband impregnating her with sperm acquired after the marriage would clearly be a co-mingling.

Moreover, there is no way to characterize or to measure any enhanced value of a 26 week old fetus that was produced by the joining of the mother’s egg and the father’s sperm, regardless of when each contribution was made.

While property acquired during marriage is presumed to be marital, the public policy of New York gives the woman full control over the progress and outcome of her pregnancy without veto power by a husband or putative father – subject only to the restrictions of the Roe v. Wade trimester regime, upon which the Florida law is based.

Accordingly, the ashes of the stillborn birth are the Wife’s separate property.

This case raises questions that have never been answered in Florida. If a pregnancy terminates in a stillbirth, should the man and woman have equal rights to the remains under standard equitable distribution law? Or does a woman’s control of her own body lead to the right answer under a Roe v. Wade approach?

Thanks to Prof. Eugene Volokh at the Volokh Conspiracy for the pointer. The case of Jackson v. Jackson can be read here.