Father's Day...Not Only A Hallmark Moment

                  Well, here we are, less than a week before “Father’s Day,” and I thought, what a good time for families going through a divorce, or families living in their post-divorce era, to contemplate an appropriate way to celebrate this “Hallmark moment” occasion.

                  Now, for a little history (and yes, I did look this up…I mean I can’t be an expert in everything and, lawyering aside, I was always enamored by history).  Turns out, my “Hallmark moment” remark is not that far from the truth, but the origins of the holiday were purer.  In fact, Father’s Day was an offspring from Mother’s Day that had its roots much earlier in our country’s history dating back to the Civil War era.

                  In the 1860s, a divided West Virginia town proclaimed a “Mother’s Work Days” and joined together mothers of Confederate and Union   soldiers in solidarity.  Presumably the appeal was that even though these mothers’ sons were on opposite sides of the battlefield, they were all mothers and loved their children.  Eventually, the Mother’s Day we celebrate today evolved into a national holiday (but I will save more of that history for next May).

                  Father’s Day didn’t catch on that fast.  As one florist noted, “fathers haven’t the same sentimental appeal that mothers have.” (Okay, keep in mind this was, from all accounts, in the early part of the 20^th Century..these mothers may have deserved flowers, but our country didn’t even give them the right to vote).  One of the first “celebrations” however, was held in a West Virginia church on July 5, 1908,(hey, do you see a pattern here…trivia question…what state first celebrated Mother’s Day and Father’s Day…?  I would never have guessed West Virginia…someday when you blurt out this little known fact and impress your friends and family you will thank me) where a preacher’s Sunday sermon memorialized 362 men who died seven months before in a coal mine explosion.  A year later, Sonora Smart Dodd, one of six children raised by a widower in Washington State, tried to establish the equivalent of Mother’s Day for fathers. Two years later, on July 19, 1910, the nation’s first statewide Father’s Day was celebrated. 

                  Nonetheless, apparently it was the fathers who “scoffed at the holiday’s sentimental attempts to domesticate manliness with flowers and gift-giving….often paid for by the father himself.”

                  During the 1920s and 1930s a movement arose attempting to combine Mother’s Day and Father’s Day into a Parents Day.  A radio performer of the day, Robert Spere said that, “both parents should be loved and respected together.” You see where that went…as it was apparently retailers who fought a consolidation of the holidays concerned that it would limit  consumer spending.                 

                  Father’s Day was not officially declared a national holiday until 1972 by President Richard Nixon (though I’m pretty sure we celebrate this in our house long before 1972). Okay, so he was a crook, but  he fathered Father’s Day!

                  But as noted above …Father’s Day did not have its roots in commercialism.  It seems that the nation’s fathers themselves were not interested in a holiday celebrated by gift-giving. That first West Virginia father’s day commemorated the loss of 362 fathers, parents to children who would never again feel a father’s love, or learn the life lessons he could teach.  And that second Father’s Day was promoted by a daughter who, having lost her mother, knew only too well the importance of a father.

                  So moms, yes, I know your children’s father may not be the “top dog” at present, and last month he did nothing for Mother’s Day,  perhaps he was late paying child support (or, heaven forbid, you’re paying it to him and you can’t stand it that you make more money than he does…but that doesn’t make him a bad dad, does it?), and he’s done a bunch of other things that not only do not make him a candidate for “Husband of the Year”(that’s why you’re getting divorced) let alone “Father of the Year,” (and sorry, my guy has both of those awards locked up). But your kids (those little men and women) are made up of equal parts of BOTH OF YOU.

                  So suck it up… Help your kids make it a special day for dad.  That doesn’t mean expensive gifts or any gifts at all.  It could be as simple as a card (hand- made is even better), or baking a cake or some cookies, or helping them plan a picnic (PB&J is fine…it’s the thought that counts).   Will it do anything to smooth relations between the two of you?  Who knows?  But what it will do is make your children feel that THEY have done something special for their father, and since they are 50 percent of him, it will likely make your kids feel special too.  And as parents, isn’t that really what it’s all about?

No Trust in Trusts as Largest Divorce Judgment Busts Billionaire’s Attempt to Conceal Assets

        A Geneva, Switzerland court last month handed down “the most expensive divorce in history,”  according to the happy wife’s lawyer.  At least I assume the Russian tycoon’s lawyer is happy since Dmitry Rybolovlev, the former husband, was ordered to hand over an estimated $4.5 billion (4 billion Swiss francs) to his former wife, Elena Rybolovleva, amounting to half of his fortune.

        According to the Guardian newspaper in London, the divorce began in 2008, when the former wife (and currently really rich person) filed for divorce in Switzerland.  Her attorney’s initial actions included winning a freeze on a number of the now only semi-uber rich Rybolovlev’s  assets, including a majority interest in AS Monaco, a French soccer club, a $295,000,000 interest in the Bank of Cyprus and Donald Trump’s former Palm Beach mansion, La Maison de l’Amitie, that he bought for $95 million in 2008. (Maybe he was trying to get away from his wife).

         It appears from the article I read that the sly Mr. Rybolovlev, who made his fortune in post-Soviet Russia in the fertilizer business, transferred a significant amount of his assets to other relatives and into trusts and offshore accounts, allegedly prior to his wife beginning divorce proceedings.

        The Swiss court was apparently not persuaded by the attempts to shield Mr. Rybolovlev’s assets from his wife through these trusts, and threw all of the assets into one very large pot, dividing that stew equally between the parties.  So, if you are contemplating divorce and want to put your trust in a trust to shield assets from your spouse, you may want to think twice.  This guy, with all of his money, should have been really good at trying to protect these assets.  He failed (at this point), and if he can’t win, think about your chances. 

       Not surprisingly, Rybolovlev’s attorney, Tetiana Bersheda, said the decision will be appealed. 

       Of course, there is always the possibility that the parties will settle before the appeal is resolved.  I mean, really, is it going to make a big difference in Elena’s life if she ends up with, say, $2 billion?  In the mean time, I suppose the fees each party’s legal team earns continues to mount as the case goes on… Hmmmmm.

       Oh, and by the way, Elena also won custody of the parties’ 13 year-old daughter.  Glad the child was such a priority.

Museum of Broken Relationships...Is Your Divorce the Next Exhibit?

                  One of my favorite “Sunday” things to do is read the travel section of the paper.  Perhaps sitting on my patio enjoying a cup of American coffee and reading about Paris is the next best thing to croissants on the Champs Elysees.

                  This past Sunday I came across Rick Steve’s weekly column about “odd” museums in Europe.  The one particular museum mentioned that caught my eye was The Museum of Broken Relationships, located in Zagreb, Croatia.  According to Steves, (the famous travel guru who I long to come back as in my next life) the museum features “stories from failed couples from around the world, together with items representing their relationships.”  Included in the museum’s collection are “discarded wedding albums, sex toys with stories about unreasonable requests and plenty of items broken with vengeful wrath.”  Interesting to note is that the collection is “ever-changing” according to Steves.

                  As a family law and divorce attorney, I could not help but wonder if a similar museum would succeed in South Florida.  My mind began to work overtime as I created displays of various relics in my overactive imagination.   Broken crystal glasses, broken dishes, broken vases (hey, broken ANYTHING…think I’ve seen it all)  keys used to scratch cars, piles of empty wine bottles (perhaps we could turn them into some sort of free-form sculpture), ripped articles of clothing,  photos of storage units warehousing all the missing marital property, an iphone (or Android- I am politically correct) display where patrons could scroll through select text messages between parties and/or the cheating spouse and his/her paramour, videos of (fill in the blank) recorded by the private investigator, and so much more.  Come to think of it, I am sure I could truly have an ever changing collection that might even eclipse that of the Zagreb museum.   After all, doesn’t it always seem that the whacky news stories have at least some connection to South Florida?

                  Notwithstanding that I now revealed two alternate careers I might have enjoyed, to wit: museum curator and travel expert,   I suspect I will be in back in my office tomorrow, and the day after and, quite candidly, for the foreseeable future.  Still, I can always dream that in spite of imagining myself engaging in a new occupation, what I would really enjoy is not being able to think of more items to add to the “Broken Relationship Museum.”

                  True, whenever a marriage or relationship ends, usually there are remnants of what used to be.  Why expend so much energy in destroying these vestiges of the past? Maybe if people going through a divorce or breakup thought the results of their irrational actions would end up in some Broward County divorce attorney’s hypothetical museum they’d think before they sink. (Did I mentioned the sunken yacht?)    In all truthfulness, if couples going through these difficult times could focus on the good that previously existed in the relationship instead of dwelling on the bad, then they would spend much less time and a lot less money on attorneys and be ready to move on.  They might even save enough to go have those croissants in Paris.  

Politics Kills Alimony Reform in 2014 Legislative Session Election Year Climate Not Favorable for Controversy

A year ago I could not keep up with my blogs discussing the latest and greatest on the proposed alimony reform bills pending in the Florida House and Senate.  As you may recall, ultimately the House and Senate of Florida passed an alimony reform bill that would have had major ramifications, not only as it applied to alimony, but as it applied to time sharing between parents as well as other significant changes to family law overall.

            Then in the eleventh (literally) hour, Governor Rick Scott vetoed the bill, leaving the law unchanged last year, but still with the significant changes made to Florida alimony in the prior few years.  My parting words last spring, however, to paraphrase Arnold  Schwarzenegger (before he was California governor, and before he impregnated Maria's and his nanny)was that alimony reform will "be back."

            Well, in case you missed the new flash, it's not coming back this year.  I actually was privy to this information at the beginning of February when I attended the annual Florida Bar Marital and Family Law review course in Orlando, and the powers that be told us so. 

             It seems that since this is a Florida gubernatorial election year, our dear Gov was concerned that even introducing such a bill would create controversy (you think???), and no matter which way the shoe fell, even having the bill up for consideration was just bad politics.   Ritch Workman, the state representative from Florida's 52nd district, along with  Senator Kelli Stargel, who were the starring proponents of last year's legislation, were slated to give it another go this year.  According to my sources back in February, the outline of the bill (backed by F.A.R. -our friends at Florida Alimony Reform, who believe alimony is the root of all evil, particularly the evil of ex wives) was not that far off from where the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar felt that a compromise might be forthcoming.

            Seems Governor Scott was more concerned about advocating for other legislation that would create a more favorable political climate for his re-election.    This lines up directly with F.A.R. president  Alan  Frisher's sad lament in late February  when he expressed that he had "a frustration that is beyond words," after Workman let him know that Stargel and he decided to forego filing an alimony reform bill during the current legislative session.

           Ah, politics.  You have to love them.  It will be interesting to see how the governor's race shakes out, and what effect Scott's re-election, or the election of one of the Democrats vying for the position, has on the future of alimony reform.  If Scott wins re-election and backs next year's bill remember, you read it here first.   As to this subject, next year I'll be back!

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