Donna Austin, 37 at the time, signed a prenuptial agreement waiving alimony before marrying Craig Austin back in 1989, in what was a second marriage for both parties. Nonetheless, a Massachusetts appeals court has decided that her alimony waiver is “unreasonable” and will not be enforced. A lawyer for Craig Austin says his client plans appeal and says Donna Austin benefited substantially from the division of property assets from the marriage. (David Weber, Boston Herald, Dec. 30). And the New Jersey Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether Craig Caplan, who retired in his 30s with a so-called silver parachute, should be obliged to return to the work force to pay increased child support, thus sparing his ex-wife Sandra the need to dip into her $2.4 million divorce settlement; for more on the “imputed-income” doctrine, see Sept. 18, 2003 (Michael Booth, “In Divorce Case, Early Retiree Gets Tangled in Silver Parachute”, New Jersey Law Journal, Oct. 6).
Posts Tagged ‘family law’
Update: emotional-distress claim against divorce lawyer
Bad news for the disgruntled divorce client in the case reported on here Nov. 17: a state appellate court has ordered San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ronald Quidachay to reconsider his ruling allowing the client to claim emotional distress damages over the attorney’s alleged mishandling of his divorce (which the attorney denies). Ryan Kent of San Rafael, Calif., representing defendant attorney Joseph Pisano, said a claim for emotional distress damages “just opens up a whole bag of worms”. And: “It’s too open-ended. It’s not predictable.” We know plenty of defendants in other professions that must wish they had the benefit of that logic. (Pam Smith, “Calif. Appeal Court Unmoved by Emotional Distress Claim in Malpractice Case”, The Recorder, Dec. 22). More: George Wallace and David Giacalone comment.
Update: taking kids away from abused mothers
New York City, settling a controversy discussed in this space Jul. 12, 2000 and Oct. 31, 2004, has “essentially conced[ed] that children could not be placed in foster care just because their mothers had been abused.” (Leslie Kaufman, “City Settles Suit Over Separating Abused Mothers From Children”, New York Times, Dec. 18).
Vt.-Va. lesbian custody battle
Matchmaker liability
Boy meets girl. Boy marries girl and later assaults her. Girl successfully sues Internet foreign-brides matchmaking agency Encounters International for as much as $434,000 before a Baltimore jury, “for failing to screen its male clients and failing to tell her about the so-called battered spouse waiver, a provision in immigration law intended to help foreign nationals escape abusive relationships without fear of automatic deportation.” (Eric Rich, “Battered Wife Wins Suit Against Md. Matchmaker”, Washington Post, Nov. 19). More: Nadya Labi covered the Fox-Spivack lawsuit in Legal Affairs’ Jan.-Feb issue. And the text of the 1996 federal law on mail-order brides is here.
Emotional distress from lawyer’s handling of divorce
Take a number dept.: on Sept. 23 we reported on an unusual case in which a court had ordered the Internal Revenue Service to pay a taxpayer $10,000 for the emotional distress occasioned by its overzealous collection techniques. Now San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ronald Quidachay has allowed a suit to go forward in which client Vincenzo Rinaldi wants money to compensate him for the emotional distress he says he suffered as a consequence of lawyer Joseph Pisano’s alleged less-than-ideal handling of his divorce. An attorney for Pisano maintains his client “did nothing wrong in handling the divorce” and that, contrary to the suit’s allegations, there was never any doubt as to the validity of Rinaldi’s remarriage. Most courts have disallowed emotional-distress damages in cases alleging legal malpractice, perhaps in part from fear (as with the parallel case of IRS-inflicted emotional distress) of opening floodgates too vast to contemplate. (Pam Smith, “Malpractice Suit Says Divorce Doubt Led to Distress”, The Recorder, Oct. 22). Update Dec. 26: appellate court unwelcoming to emotional-distress claim.
Illinois alienation of affection
While just about everything else has become more actionable in today’s compensation culture, there has been a countertrend in family law. Most states have barred suits for the ancient tort of “alienation of affection” by jilted spouses. Utah (May 18, 2000) and North Carolina are exceptions, as is Illinois; there, Steven Cyl is suing a neighbor he says stole his wife. “Is this thing for real?” asks the defendant. Previous Illinois alienation-of-affection plaintiffs include the always-entertaining ex-Rep. Mel “Did I win the Lotto?” Reynolds, whose case was thrown out for unspecified reasons. (Steve Patterson, “‘This guy, he ruined my life’ — so man sues”, Chicago Sun-Times, Nov. 15 (via Bashman); “Former Congressman Mel Reynolds takes estranged wife’s lover to court”, Jet, Aug. 12, 2002; “Davidson Wrestling Coach Awarded $1.4 Million For ‘Theft of Wife?s Heart'”, North Carolina Lawyers Weekly, May 23, 2001). The ever-obnoxious Pat Buchanan approves. (“What is a Family Worth?”, Aug. 11, 1997; Hutelmyer v. Cox (N.C. App. 1999)).
Take my ex-husband’s assets (please)
Diana Bilinelli, ex-wife of the late Saudi Sheik Mohammed al-Fassi, says she’s decided to sell her $250 million divorce judgment at a substantial discount if she can find the right buyer. She hopes a buyer will have better luck then she has at tracking down al-Fassi’s assets. “It’s a dandy investment opportunity,” says her lawyer, Helen Dorroh-White. (“Woman Selling $250M Divorce Judgment”, AP/ABCNews.com, Nov. 8; Marcus Warren, “For sale: a ?135m divorce package with royal strings”, Daily Telegraph (UK), Nov. 11).
State marriage amendments: vote no
Update: “Letting Children Witness Abuse Not Ground for Taking Them”
Welcome news from New York’s highest court: “A battered woman’s failure to prevent her children from witnessing her own abuse does not automatically give protective agencies license to remove the child, the New York Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday in a groundbreaking opinion.” (John Caher, New York Law Journal, Oct. 27). Four years ago (see “Battered? hand over your kids”, Jul. 12, 2000) the New York Times reported that city child protection authorities were removing children from homes in which one parent was found to have committed an act of domestic violence on the other, including such actions as slaps and shoving. “The rules encourage victims of abuse to conceal it, fearing their kids will be taken from them if they tell medical or social workers.” Update Dec. 19: New York City agrees to change policy.