Hi. I’m Jason Castle. I’m a partner at Jaburg & Wilk. My practice areas focus on family law and criminal defense. Prenuptial agreements have grown in popularity over the last few years. Prenuptial agreements are agreements that become effective at the date of marriage. They’re very broad in what they can cover.
One example of that is a social media clause which is also fairly new and growing in popularity. A social media clause in your agreement would negotiate prior to the marriage how social media will be utilized during the marriage and in the event of a divorce. You can outline, for example, what can and cannot be posted on social media websites. You can also determine who is going to control photos and information that is recorded during your marriage.
I recently wrote an article about couples that have engaged in private moments and recorded them on film or camera, and the concerns that arise at the point of a divorce when one of the parties decides to post that information on the Internet for the world to see. In the event that you’ve thought of this beforehand and you had a social media clause, you could preclude that, and you could also include sanctions and methods for you to remove the materials from the Internet once it does occur.
By: Jason Castle
Hi. I’m Jason Castle. I’m a partner at Jaburg & Wilk. My practice areas focus on family law and criminal defense. Prenuptial agreements have grown in popularity over the last few years. Prenuptial agreements are agreements that become effective at the date of marriage. They’re very broad in what they can cover.
One example of that is a social media clause which is also fairly new and growing in popularity. A social media clause in your agreement would negotiate prior to the marriage how social media will be utilized during the marriage and in the event of a divorce. You can outline, for example, what can and cannot be posted on social media websites. You can also determine who is going to control photos and information that is recorded during your marriage.
I recently wrote an article about couples that have engaged in private moments and recorded them on film or camera, and the concerns that arise at the point of a divorce when one of the parties decides to post that information on the Internet for the world to see. In the event that you’ve thought of this beforehand and you had a social media clause, you could preclude that, and you could also include sanctions and methods for you to remove the materials from the Internet once it does occur.
By: Jason Castle
I’m Kathi Sandweiss. I’m the Chair of the appellate practice section at Jaburg and Wilk.
You can appeal basically any final judgement, and that means you can appeal a dissolution, but it’s not as if you’re no longer divorced. You’re not appealing the fact of the divorce. What you’re appealing typically is about money. It can be about something else, but typically somebody will appeal a distribution of property, for example. And a lot of times that will go back to what the lower court determined was the value, for example, of a business. And the value of that business will then impact how your property is distributed.
One of the basic errors that someone alleges in the divorce decree, in the dissolution decree is that a business was not valued properly. So, that goes back to a dueling expert standard. My expert witness, say, valued my art practice at $300,000. Your expert witness valued my business at $500,000, and that’ll determine a lot of how much money is distributed to each party. The problem with it is you’re looking at credibility of witnesses, and you don’t want to be in the position of asking the higher court to determine that there was a factual error because that’s a much tougher standard on appeal.
By: Kathi Sandweiss
I’m Kathi Sandweiss. I’m the Chair of the appellate practice section at Jaburg and Wilk.
You can appeal basically any final judgement, and that means you can appeal a dissolution, but it’s not as if you’re no longer divorced. You’re not appealing the fact of the divorce. What you’re appealing typically is about money. It can be about something else, but typically somebody will appeal a distribution of property, for example. And a lot of times that will go back to what the lower court determined was the value, for example, of a business. And the value of that business will then impact how your property is distributed.
One of the basic errors that someone alleges in the divorce decree, in the dissolution decree is that a business was not valued properly. So, that goes back to a dueling expert standard. My expert witness, say, valued my art practice at $300,000. Your expert witness valued my business at $500,000, and that’ll determine a lot of how much money is distributed to each party. The problem with it is you’re looking at credibility of witnesses, and you don’t want to be in the position of asking the higher court to determine that there was a factual error because that’s a much tougher standard on appeal.
By: Kathi Sandweiss
Hi. My name is Mitchell Reichman. I’m a board certified specialist in family law and chair of the family law department at Jaburg & Wilk. Opting out is choosing to resolve a family law dispute outside the traditional judicial system. One of the ways parties can choose to opt out is by choosing to arbitrate.
Arbitration is a voluntary process. It’s beyond the jurisdiction of a judge to order parties to arbitrate. However, once parties do decide to arbitrate, a court order will be entered that appoints the arbitrator and governs the process. Generally in Arizona, arbitrations are governed by a set of statutes known as Arizona’s Arbitration Act. One of the advantages of arbitration is that the parties can choose the neutral that serves as the arbitrator based on the parties’ circumstances, particularly where the issues are specialized such as with the valuation of a business or professional practice. The parties can chose an arbitrator who has a greater amount of education, training, and experience than the judge randomly assigned to their case. This gives the parties the opportunity to obtain a more predictable outcome because the arbitrator is familiar with the issues that will be presented in a valuation analysis, and the judge might not be. An important difference between choosing to arbitrate a dispute as compared to a trial concerns the right to appeal.
Under Arizona’s Arbitration Act, people who choose to arbitrate have very limited rights to appeal the decision of the arbitrator. This is very dissimilar from their rights to appeal should a judge make the decision after a trial on the merits. Overall, however, in many cases we find that by choosing to opt out through a process of arbitration, we’re able to reach our goal of helping our clients obtain a more favorable result in their family law proceeding.
Hi. My name is Mitchell Reichman. I’m a board certified specialist in family law and chair of the family law department at Jaburg & Wilk. Opting out is choosing to resolve a family law dispute outside the traditional judicial system. One of the ways parties can choose to opt out is by choosing to arbitrate.
Arbitration is a voluntary process. It’s beyond the jurisdiction of a judge to order parties to arbitrate. However, once parties do decide to arbitrate, a court order will be entered that appoints the arbitrator and governs the process. Generally in Arizona, arbitrations are governed by a set of statutes known as Arizona’s Arbitration Act. One of the advantages of arbitration is that the parties can choose the neutral that serves as the arbitrator based on the parties’ circumstances, particularly where the issues are specialized such as with the valuation of a business or professional practice. The parties can chose an arbitrator who has a greater amount of education, training, and experience than the judge randomly assigned to their case. This gives the parties the opportunity to obtain a more predictable outcome because the arbitrator is familiar with the issues that will be presented in a valuation analysis, and the judge might not be. An important difference between choosing to arbitrate a dispute as compared to a trial concerns the right to appeal.
Under Arizona’s Arbitration Act, people who choose to arbitrate have very limited rights to appeal the decision of the arbitrator. This is very dissimilar from their rights to appeal should a judge make the decision after a trial on the merits. Overall, however, in many cases we find that by choosing to opt out through a process of arbitration, we’re able to reach our goal of helping our clients obtain a more favorable result in their family law proceeding.
Hello, I want to speak to you today about whether you need a reason for obtaining a divorce in the state of Arizona. Arizona is a no fault divorce state, which means that other than alleging the marriage is irretrievably broken, you do not have to state a reason or prove a reason to obtain a divorce in Arizona. If you have any other questions regarding the need to file for divorce or questions regarding divorce or legal separation, please feel free to contact me.
By: Chris Hildebrand
Hello, I want to speak to you today about whether you need a reason for obtaining a divorce in the state of Arizona. Arizona is a no fault divorce state, which means that other than alleging the marriage is irretrievably broken, you do not have to state a reason or prove a reason to obtain a divorce in Arizona. If you have any other questions regarding the need to file for divorce or questions regarding divorce or legal separation, please feel free to contact me.
By: Chris Hildebrand
A divorce, an annulment, and a legal separation are all very similar in many respects, so there are a couple of important key differences that you should understand. When asked to enter a divorce, annulment, or a legal separation, the court is required to enter specific orders. If there are children involved, the court is required to make orders as to child support. The court is also required to enter orders explaining which parent is going to have the parenting time with the children and which parent, or both parents are going to have the legal decision-making for the child. Even if there are no children involved, the court is required to enter orders as to spousal support. Also, the court is required to enter orders dividing up the assets and debt of the parties. In those respects, a divorce, an annulment, and a legal separation are all very similar.
Now, the differences are also important to understand. In a divorce, the judge is essentially saying, “I now pronounce the parties no longer man and wife”. With an annulment, the judge is saying, “We’re going to pretend that you guys were never really married”. With a legal separation, the parties actually remain married, but the court has divided up all the assets and debts. In a legal separation case, if the parties are able to reconcile the marriage, the court can remove the legal separation, and they are back to being married. If you would like more information, please contact me at (480) 733-6800, or you can visit us online.
For additional information on divorce, annulment and legal separation in Arizona, please visit a profile and complete a contact form.
A divorce, an annulment, and a legal separation are all very similar in many respects, so there are a couple of important key differences that you should understand. When asked to enter a divorce, annulment, or a legal separation, the court is required to enter specific orders. If there are children involved, the court is required to make orders as to child support. The court is also required to enter orders explaining which parent is going to have the parenting time with the children and which parent, or both parents are going to have the legal decision-making for the child. Even if there are no children involved, the court is required to enter orders as to spousal support. Also, the court is required to enter orders dividing up the assets and debt of the parties. In those respects, a divorce, an annulment, and a legal separation are all very similar.
Now, the differences are also important to understand. In a divorce, the judge is essentially saying, “I now pronounce the parties no longer man and wife”. With an annulment, the judge is saying, “We’re going to pretend that you guys were never really married”. With a legal separation, the parties actually remain married, but the court has divided up all the assets and debts. In a legal separation case, if the parties are able to reconcile the marriage, the court can remove the legal separation, and they are back to being married. If you would like more information, please contact me at (480) 733-6800, or you can visit us online.
For additional information on divorce, annulment and legal separation in Arizona, please visit a profile and complete a contact form.
It is a general rule that an Arizona court must equitably divide all of the spouses community property and debts, without regard to marital misconduct when it enters its final decree of dissolution of marriage. The term equitable is a concept of fairness, depending upon the facts of a particular case.
Consistent with this fairness concept, the court may not order the sale of a community marital residence during the pendency of a divorce proceeding absent an agreement of spouses, a separately filed and consolidated partition action, or circumstances which demonstrate that the residence is at risk of being foreclosed, and neither spouse has the ability to void the foreclosure to preserve existing equity in the residence.
An equitable division of community property is not necessarily or presumptively an equal division of community property. Having said that, an equal division of community property and debts by a court in a divorce proceeding generally will be the most equitable result. However, there sometimes are circumstances that exist which lead a court to unequally divide community assets or debts because the judge determines it is equitable or fair to do so. The court may consider excessive or abnormal expenditures by a spouse, such as those to support gambling habits or drug addiction during marriage, for example.
The court also may consider a spouse’s destruction, concealment, or fraudulent disposition of community, joint, or common property in it’s division of community assets and debts. These particular matters often are referred to as waste, and can result in the court making an unequal division of community assets or debts.
By: Kevin Park
It is a general rule that an Arizona court must equitably divide all of the spouses community property and debts, without regard to marital misconduct when it enters its final decree of dissolution of marriage. The term equitable is a concept of fairness, depending upon the facts of a particular case.
Consistent with this fairness concept, the court may not order the sale of a community marital residence during the pendency of a divorce proceeding absent an agreement of spouses, a separately filed and consolidated partition action, or circumstances which demonstrate that the residence is at risk of being foreclosed, and neither spouse has the ability to void the foreclosure to preserve existing equity in the residence.
An equitable division of community property is not necessarily or presumptively an equal division of community property. Having said that, an equal division of community property and debts by a court in a divorce proceeding generally will be the most equitable result. However, there sometimes are circumstances that exist which lead a court to unequally divide community assets or debts because the judge determines it is equitable or fair to do so. The court may consider excessive or abnormal expenditures by a spouse, such as those to support gambling habits or drug addiction during marriage, for example.
The court also may consider a spouse’s destruction, concealment, or fraudulent disposition of community, joint, or common property in it’s division of community assets and debts. These particular matters often are referred to as waste, and can result in the court making an unequal division of community assets or debts.
By: Kevin Park
Everybody of course insists upon having prompt and immediate decisions on child support, custody, spousal maintenance and all of the things that are necessary to maintain stability in the family during the pendency of a divorce and the court’s set hearings promptly and as quickly as possible often within a matter of two or three weeks, where ordinarily to get a hearing in a court would take two or three months.
But, everybody recognizes that the wife or mother may be home with kids with no employment of her own and depending on the father for support and so the court sets early dates, gets people in and covers all bases right up front and people are always interested in those factors. We try to be available to answer their questions up front.
By: CD Owens
Everybody of course insists upon having prompt and immediate decisions on child support, custody, spousal maintenance and all of the things that are necessary to maintain stability in the family during the pendency of a divorce and the court’s set hearings promptly and as quickly as possible often within a matter of two or three weeks, where ordinarily to get a hearing in a court would take two or three months.
But, everybody recognizes that the wife or mother may be home with kids with no employment of her own and depending on the father for support and so the court sets early dates, gets people in and covers all bases right up front and people are always interested in those factors. We try to be available to answer their questions up front.
By: CD Owens
Hi, I’m Mitch Reichman. I’m a State Board of Arizona Certified Specialist in Family Law, and I practice at Jaburg and Wilk.
Yes, typically you’ll have to appear in court at least once. Judges in Maricopa County in divorce cases are very proactive, and so they call the parties to appear in front of them early on in the case to assess what their positions are and what other services might be required to help process the case, such as appraisers or custody evaluators. That appearance is not an appearance where you have to testify, but you will typically have to appear at least once in front of the judge.
One of the things that we do in your case is we put orders into place so that there is predictability while your case is proceeding. Those are called temporary orders. Orders for child support, orders for spousal maintenance, who gets possession of the house, how the bills get paid, these things need to be done in an orderly way, and we like to have court orders so that we are able to enforce people’s obligations during the process. That would typically require a hearing of some kind, and at that hearing, you would have to testify. That does not necessarily mean that you’ll have to testify for a long time, or that you would have to testify in a trial. It is possible to complete your divorce without having a trial. In fact, we prefer that our clients complete their divorces without having trial, because trial is the most unpredictable way to resolve your divorce. There are a number of different alternatives, all of which we will explore. One is mediation. Another is arbitration, which is essentially hiring a private judge to make the decisions in your case. We can also ask our judge to appoint someone – called a Family Law Master – to essentially take the place of the judge, and have hearings, and make recommendations in terms of findings. So there are a lot of different ways to settle your case or resolve it without having to go to trial.
Hi, I’m Mitch Reichman. I’m a State Board of Arizona Certified Specialist in Family Law, and I practice at Jaburg and Wilk.
Yes, typically you’ll have to appear in court at least once. Judges in Maricopa County in divorce cases are very proactive, and so they call the parties to appear in front of them early on in the case to assess what their positions are and what other services might be required to help process the case, such as appraisers or custody evaluators. That appearance is not an appearance where you have to testify, but you will typically have to appear at least once in front of the judge.
One of the things that we do in your case is we put orders into place so that there is predictability while your case is proceeding. Those are called temporary orders. Orders for child support, orders for spousal maintenance, who gets possession of the house, how the bills get paid, these things need to be done in an orderly way, and we like to have court orders so that we are able to enforce people’s obligations during the process. That would typically require a hearing of some kind, and at that hearing, you would have to testify. That does not necessarily mean that you’ll have to testify for a long time, or that you would have to testify in a trial. It is possible to complete your divorce without having a trial. In fact, we prefer that our clients complete their divorces without having trial, because trial is the most unpredictable way to resolve your divorce. There are a number of different alternatives, all of which we will explore. One is mediation. Another is arbitration, which is essentially hiring a private judge to make the decisions in your case. We can also ask our judge to appoint someone – called a Family Law Master – to essentially take the place of the judge, and have hearings, and make recommendations in terms of findings. So there are a lot of different ways to settle your case or resolve it without having to go to trial.
A Judge Can Order a Parent to Attend Counseling in Arizona
A Judge Orders a Parent to Attend Domestic Violence Counseling in Arizona Can a judge order a parent in a child custody…
Read MoreArizona Dissolution of Marriage
In divorce, many issues require a resolution. Those issues can be resolved either by you or by the court before you can…
Read More
