Divorce Corp...the Movie (Remember, it is Only a Movie)

             As I tried tonight, before leaving the office, to get through the daily deluge of emails, I came across one with the words “**Media Alert**” spaced strategically across the top.    The “alert” notified me that this very evening a screening of Divorce Corp. was schedule for the Oaks Premier Theatre in Melbourne, Florida. “Oh, pshaw,” I said (mainly to myself since nobody was left in the office), “it’s already 7:00 and the movie starts at 8:00 and I’m at least two plus hours away…I’ll never make it.”

             So, after I removed my tongue that I had firmly placed in my cheek, and after I went home, and had dinner, I decided to do the next best thing.  I watched a series of YouTube trailers for the movie on my trusty lap top computer.  Well, I’ll tell you, Herbert Morrison’s famous quote on seeing the Hindenburg burst into flames in 1937, could well have been repeated with equal emotion on viewing these trailers…”Oh, the humanity!!!”

    

             Yes folks, I watched quip after quip of investigators, law professors and people who had been involved in horrific divorces (“Oh the humanity!”) go on and on about how horrible the divorce process is and how it ruins lives.

  

             One trailer opens with an individual stating, “Death is easier than divorce.” Does he know?  Has he previously died?  But, yes, I understand, divorce is an end, and emotionally it has been ranked up there with other life shaking events such as the death of a loved one, losing a job, moving from a home, etc.  Why?  Because divorce is a loss, a big loss.  However, let’s remember that it is a husband, or a wife who initiates the divorce process.  Truly, even if things are slow, I’ve never walked up to a married couple and suggested they get divorced to drum up business.  (Though I have had married friends take dibs on having me represent them if they divorced- I hope in jest-but I did consider it a compliment)

   

             Divorce Corp., or the trailers at least, would have you believe that lawyers cause all of the problems associated with divorce. A quote in point,” I came for help and came out with my family destroyed.”

             Well, person (whoever you were) quoted above, let’s start with the fact that you came to an attorney to get a divorce.   You were already destroying your family as it existed before divorce.  No lawyer did that!

             Or another trailer that discussed that the parties to divorce had “so many incentives to lie in Court.”   People have incentives to lie about many aspects of life…not just divorce….to get what they want.  Can I tell when my clients are untruthful?  Sometimes.  Do I let them go before a court and outright lie?  Absolutely not.  In fact, there are ethical cannons that prohibit lawyers from remaining on a case if they know a client is going to lie on the stand.  This trailer suggests that lawyers actually tell clients to make things up.  Now, I am not so naïve to think that this never happens. Clearly, the Florida Bar News   regularly publishes the names of attorneys who have been disciplined by, suspended from or actually disbarred from the Florida Bar.  Rest assured, however, that the names appearing are not all, and in fact are rarely family law attorneys.

                 

             Besides lying, people (and I mean the clients) are frequently less than truthful in disclosing all of their assets.  So what happens?   The other spouse’s attorney is entrusted in trying to discovery what the person is hiding.  Does that take time?  Yes...  Does that take money?  Yes.  But folks, the situation was not created by the attorney.   The true reality is that when people get divorced, usually one of the parties (and often both) is angry, really angry.  And these former “till death do us part” companions, are, at least figuratively, ready to see that death of the other party during the divorce process.

   

             And, the film tells its viewers, divorce lawyers are in it for the money. Really? Did anyone consider that being a family lawyer is a job, and, as with anyone who has a job, we anticipate getting paid for performing that job? (Otherwise I could sit home and write blogs all day, which, really, is a lot more fun).  But truly, it is, in most cases, the parties…the soon to be ex spouses, who exacerbate the situation and cause cases to drag on and cost a heck of a lot more than they would if the parties were up front honest, understood that prolonged fighting only eats up the marital pie and, in a nutshell, can’t get past moving on.  Sure, there are some attorneys who do fuel the fire, but as one of those who likes to extinguish those “hot spots” with rationality, compassion and a true desire to ensure that a client has a fair resolution and that the parties can still talk to each other, I resent being grouped in with the few who do not share my view.

    

             So maybe it’s my time to produce a movie.  I think I’ll call it “The Cause of Divorce…Marriage.” 

    

Prenuptial Agreements…Where there’s a Will, There’s Not Necessarily a Way

Do you know someone who is thinking of getting married.  This time it will last forever….”Till death do us part,” as the vows say.  No worries about divorce, but what about your grandpa’s money when he dies.  No worries.  Grandpa’s will provides for all the grandchildren so we are fine.

It is time to think again. There is a “dirty little legal secret” lurking in Florida (and perhaps other states as well), that creates a trap for the uninformed.  Now, if you continue to read on you will no longer be part of the uninformed and hopefully, neither you nor your loved ones will fall into this potential trap.

Okay, here we go… Let’s say you have two loving grandparents who always told you they would pay for your college (and, if lucky, graduate school) or would give you money for your first house, or Mercedes or whatever…. “We have it all written out in our wills,” they assure you.

Then Grandma passes away.  Grandpa gets a little lonely until he hooks up with the widow “Bernice,” who he meets at the Century Village Clubhouse in Broward County, Florida.   After about a year of Bernice wooing Grandpa with pot roast and apple pie (and heaven knows what else), Grandpa decides to do the honorable thing and tells the family he’s tying the knot.  After seeing the expression on your face  (L), Grandpa takes you aside and assures you that, regardless of what happens, you are still in his will, and he will make good on his promises.

Of course you trust that Grandpa is still thinking with his heart, and all is well.

A month after the wedding, and three weeks after your acceptance to Harvard Dental School, Grandpa dies of a heart attack.  “He died with a smile on his face,” Bernice says. Obviously you are saddened that Grandpa is gone and he won’t have the joy of seeing you graduate from dental school.  But you know that Grandpa will be with you in spirit because, after all, his generosity is helping make this deal happen.

Several weeks later, as that hefty deposit for Harvard is about due, you call Grandpa’s estate attorney and ask if it would be possible to get the necessary funds.

“Unfortunately,” you hear the attorney say, “Your Grandpa’s wife has opted to elect against the will and claim her spousal share of Grandpa’s estate.”

“Huh?” you reply. “Mind translating from legalese into English, please.” 

What you hear next, at least in your life, makes a root canal seem mild.  Essentially, under Florida law, notwithstanding that a spouse has a will, the surviving spouse has certain rights, including the right to take a FULL THIRD of the dead spouse’s entire estate that is subject to probate, REGARDLESS of what the will says.  So once Bernice gets her third, if the distribution per the will of your share of the remaining two-thirds does not cover that Harvard Dental School bill you are, essentially, out of luck.

So what “could” Grandpa have done to prevent these unintended results?  Think hard….like Jeopardy, the questions hints at the answer….  Ding, ding, ding.You got it!  Grandpa could have had Bernice sign a prenuptial agreement that would have waived Bernice’s rights to any of those otherwise inalienable spousal rights under Florida probate code.    Now why would Bernice have agreed to this, you might ask?

Although the list of possible reasons are plentiful, rather than take up megabytes of computer space on this exercise, suffice it to say that with a well crafter prenuptial agreement, the more affluent spouse can still provide for the other spouse and still ensure that his or her intent for other relatives is carried out.

Now, obviously, the completely fictitious example above (got to include those legal disclaimers, folks) is merely once instance where a person believes the provisions in  his or her will to be ironclad, and that is simply not the case.  An uncle, who never had kids and wants to leave all of his money to his nieces and nephews, (and does so in his will), marries a wealthy woman (who doesn’t need his money).  The uncle passes and the family discovers that she gained most of her wealth by taking other’s money including a third of the nieces’ and nephews’ in this case.

The moral of the story is simple….wealth is not the sole consideration for getting a prenuptial agreement.  In fact “wealth” may not even be a consideration at all.  It is about resolving matters as the parties intend.

So, if you or someone you know (who might want to include you in his/her will) has announced an engagement during this holiday season, suggest they consult with a seasoned family law attorney about a prenuptial agreement. Often, as I do, the family law attorney will work together with an estate planning attorney before the marriage as the future bride or groom may be able to ensure that his or her intents are carried out through trusts and other estate planning tools. 

So encourage your loved ones (or yourself) to consult with a family law attorney and think before they ink. The money they save may be your own! 

Households Headed By Single Dads Reach All-Time High

      United States households headed by single fathers now constitute nearly 25 percent of all single families with children.  Accordingly to the Pew Research Center, 2.6 million households in 2011 were headed by single dads, a nine times greater number than 1960, when single dads made up only 300,000 households nationwide. According to the study, single dads are more likely to live with a partner and more likely to be older than single moms.

     So why the rise in single fatherhood?  There may be as many reasons are there are single dads (not really), but some believe that as more women have joined the work force, so have more men taken on more of the responsibilities traditionally assumed by women.   Though this may well be one compelling reason, I believe fathers, over the years, understand that they do have a lot to contribute to children, and this is not limited by biology. To some degree, laws acknowledging that fathers have the same rights as mothers, including time sharing and what we used to call "custody" have also contributed to these statistics.  As I often tell clients waiting to adopt, the biological role of pregnancy and childbirth is the EASY part...it is after the child is born that the tough, never-ending role begins.  

      Although I am not discounting the "motherly instinct" as a biological factor, (witness the mother duck I saw herding her babies out of harms way yesterday with no father duck in sight) I believe that the father's role, whether intuitive or learned, is just as compelling.  Indeed, over my years of practice as a family law attorney I've seen some pretty sorry excuses for mothers.  Luckily, in most of those cases, I also found some very devoted fathers. (and, to be clear,  I've seen the reverse as well).

      So how does this factor into a divorce with children or a paternity case?  Quite simply, a child has a right to have a mother AND a father.  That these parents may not reside in the same household does not negate the necessity of a child learning from two parents and growing from what each has to offer the child.  If you are going through a divorce or a paternity case keep this in mind.  It's not about winning if you have your children for more time than the other parent.  It's about what is best for the children.  Yes, the other parent may do things differently than you do, and you may be convinced you're right.  But, candidly, in the scheme of the child's life, eating take-out versus well balanced organic meals will likely not make a vast difference in your child's life, no more than an occasional missed bath.(unless it's the middle of the summer, but you get the idea). 

     Of course, if there are real issues, such as physical abuse, addiction problems and an inability to provide for the children's basic needs, then that is another situation where timesharing should be restricted.   However, absent these types of situations, if you can remember to keep everything in perspective, and put aside your differences, then it will be easier to work with the other parent and I promise it will be best the for your children.  

Cindy S. Vova
Law Office of Cindy S. Vova, P.A.
8551 West Sunrise Blvd., Suite 301
Plantation, FL 33322
954.316.3496
info@vovalaw.com

Divorce-A Time to Share the Pie, But Not Too Much

 

     During the past few days, as I enter my home each evening, I am met with “stuff” strewn everywhere: towels, pillow, sheets, shorts, shirts, and shoes… lots and lots of shoes.  Yes, my baby is packing up, and heading off to the University of Florida to officially begin her college career next week and join the Gator Nation.

     So, as I reflect back over these past 18 years, I know that she accomplished quite a bit, but inside I feel that I have done so as well.  I have fulfilled one of my personal obligations by ensuring that on the financial side of matters my daughter would have no worries.  Are you asking yet how this relates to family law?  Well, here it comes.

     When I first opened the Law Offices of Cindy S. Vova, P.A. this daughter was not yet born. Her older sister was still an “only child.” My future Gator came along about two years after the firm took on its first client.   As I met with each new client, many with young children themselves, and I explained that there really was no “winning” or “loosing” in divorce, and I wanted to help them achieve a reasonable and fair outcome. I demonstrated this as follows:

   “Here,” I’d say, “is the marital pie.” At this point I drew my rendition of a circle on my yellow legal pad, where my client quickly understood why I pursued law and not art.    Then I would continue: “Now, if I draw a line down the middle of the pie, this represents basically, what the Court is going to give you and what the Court is going to give your spouse.  Of course, again, I doubt my line represented a perfect geometric division, which also explains why I did not delve into a field requiring mathematical ability .                                                                           

    Then I would proceed to use my pencil to “cut off” little slices of the pie on each side, and explain that this is what the attorneys would “eat” from each party’s half of the pie.  I explained that in order to ensure that a client received a fair deal and all issues were addressed in a divorce proceeding, that an attorney’s input and knowledge was invaluable.  “However,” I continued, “the more your spouse and you fight, the more pieces of the pie the attorneys get to eat."

     “So,” I would continue, “do you want to send your children to college or mine?  My children are going regardless, but I intend to get them there by taking little pieces of pie and putting them all together to make my kids’ pie.”

     My pie point was made.  Some clients heeded my advice, and we resolved their cases where most of their piece of pie remaind intact.  Others ignored the advice and had their pies carved up into smaller pieces.  Some clients had spouses, who had lawyers who wanted more of the pie, an unfortunate byproduct of this profession.   Still , all-in-all, when  Dominique DeSantiago, Associate Director of the Fisher School of Accounting,  responded to an email I sent him and said that UF would provide “value for my investment,” I couldn’t help but think that my philosophy in practicing family law provides “values” for my clients' investments.  

       Twenty plus years of helping clients through tough times and  trying to take only small pieces of  the collective pies of many clients has now enabled me to fulfill my parental obligation by sending my second child off to college.  I hope that she also learned by example a few important lessons about values and doing the right thing that cannot be taught in the classroom.  Those are vestiges of my daughter that will remain long after her shoes, short and sheets leave my living room. 

 

 

Six Steps to a Successful Marriage-Keeping It Together

     Last Friday an office colleague celebrated his 32^nd (!) anniversary.  As a professional who spends most of my time listening to the myriad of reasons why couples split up, I thought, why not ask him the secrets to a long term marriage.  So he was kind enough to give me this brief, but oh so important list. I’ve listed these six simple steps below:

                Number 1:          Have open, honest discussions

                Number 2:          Show a willingness to learn/share the other’s interests

                Number 3:          Support your partner’s goals and profession

                Number 4:         Share involvement with both families

                Number 5:          Work to maintain and support each other’s physical and mental well being.

                Number 6:          Always respect each other’s differences of opinions

                                These are steps Bruce and Jim have used to keep their marriage alive.  Yes, Bruce and Jim are a gay couple who, although not “married” according to the laws of the state of Florida, are clearly far more committed to an enduring relationship than the heterosexual couples who come into my office every day. These couples, usually, have far fewer years together, and are willing to call it quits for far more reasons than those that keep Bruce and Jim together.   Another colleague said Bruce should have added a 7^th reason they stay together….no children!  Although those of us in the room blessed with offspring laughed and acknowledged that kids can be a challenge to any relationship, for those who have children, this should be added as another reason to strengthen a marriage.  Surely Bruce and Jim faced challenges that evade heterosexual couples, especially 32 years ago, but they obviously used those challenges to bolster their commitment.  We all know the old adage, that “whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” 

     So, before you call it quits and end up in my office or the office of one of my colleagues’, look over the six (or seven, if you have kids) steps to success that Bruce gave me.   If an apple a day keeps the doctor away, mutual respect and understanding between partners keeps the divorce lawyer away.

Cindy S. Vova

The Law Offfice of Cindy S. Vova, P.A.

8551 West Sunrise Boulevard, Suite 301

Plantation, FL 33322

954.316.3496

info@vovalaw.com

Matches Made in Heaven-Meeting on Line

      According to a psychological study, individuals who meet on line have a better chance of a successful marriage than those who meet under other circumstances.  See :http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/03/more-satisfaction-less-divorce-for-people-who-meet-spouses-online/

     With 35 percent of  spouses marrying between 2005 and 2012 initially meeting on line, apparently one can find a partner without even leaving the comforts of home.
Apparently, according to the article, on-line matches were more successful than those beginning at work.  Now, the fact that the study was funded by e-Harmony may have "something" to do with not only the overall results, but the fact that e-Harmony rated high among successful dating sites.

     Of course, the divorce clients I've had who confessed that they met their future ex-spouses on line, always accompanied that comment with eyes rolled upwards.  Now, I'm not knocking on-line dating, but, in spite of poetic prose that may lure one into a new relationship, the bottom line is, in the long run, you have to actually live with the person...not just text and email.   And although my children may have, on occasion, texted me from their rooms when they were too lazy to get up, at least my spouse has not resorted to this method of communication. (Of course, there was no such thing as meeting "on-line" back then so we didn't fall into bad habits).

    Regardless of how you meet a potential new mate, remember this before tying the knot:  get to know the person in person, and consider entering into a prenuptial agreement before you marry. 
Just this week, three people contacted my office inquiring about a prenuptial agreement.  I don't know how these new clients met their future spouses, whether it was on-line, blind date or lifetime friends.  What I do know is, regardless of the initial meeting, they have a better chance for a successful marriage because they communicate!

Cindy Vova
Law Office of Cindy S. Vova, P.A.
8551 West Sunrise Boulevard
Suite 301
Plantation, FL 33322
954.316.3496
info@vovalaw.com
        

BYE-BYE FLORIDA ALIMONY REFORM-UNTIL WE MEET AGAIN

Dateline: Tallahassee-  T minus 4 Hours Until Deadline....

     Well, I'd like to say that Florida Governor Rick Scott read my recent blog noting that passage of the Florida Alimony Reform Bill (SB 718) might "help" individual  past, present and potentially future alimony payers, an overall and (presumably) unintended effect would be a future taxation on the state's social welfare system. Essentially, when long-term marriages end and one spouse stayed out of the paying workforce to raise a family, that spouse would be entering (or re-entering ) the workforce at around age 50, and would not accrue enough social security benefits to ever stop working once alimony ended.  That leaves the state to pitch in.

       However, with all the publicity about the details of the bill, I'm sure Mr. Scott was bright enough to see through the "special interests" who vehemently promoted this bill, and tonight he vetoed it just hours before the midnight deadline.

       But wait…it's not over until it's over.   Under Florida law, once the Governor chooses to veto a bill, the Legislature can overturn his veto the next time they meet by a two thirds vote of both chambers.
       What was the initial vote passing the law?  The Senate passed SB 718  by  a 29-11 vote, WAY more than 2/3rds, and the House passed SB by an 85-31 vote, still well over the 2/3rd. Even a lawyer can do that math.

       So, where does that leave alimony in Florida?  For now, the state of alimony remains   with the same changes made over the past few years.  I am not discarding my copy of the bill as of yet.  It will be back.  If it passes by the 2/3rd vote on the next round, I'll pull it out again….at least until someone raises a constitutional challenge.