DivorceeCorner.com Latest Blog Posts

Life After Divorce – Benefits of a Peaceful Divorce

Thu, 02 May 2013 12:25:49 GMT

We recently shared some tips for how to divorce peacefully, but as with many things, this can be easier said than done – especially when you’re in the midst of what seems like an epic battle with your soon-to-be ex. Why should you make the effort to get through this process amicably? Well, there are many benefits to choosing a peaceful divorce, particularly as it pertains to your life after divorce. After all, this is really just temporary. You still have your whole life ahead of you. So, here are a few of the many reasons why choosing peace is the way to go.

Your children will handle it much better.
There’s no way around it – if you have kids, the divorce is going to affect them. Just how profoundly depends on how you and your spouse handle the process. If they see you constantly fighting and bickering, it will wound them emotionally. You love your children and you want what’s best for them – there’s no doubt about that. Allowing them to see their parents treating each other with respect and working out their differences amicably is a gift they will forever be grateful for.

You’ll save a lot of money.
Fighting over every minor detail and going for the jugular may seem tempting, but it will only end up costing you time, aggravation and lots and lots of money in the long run. Try to think about all the things you can use that money for in your life after divorce – planning for your future, sending your kids to camp or saving for their college education, planning special vacations together that you’ll cherish for years to come. Divorcing peacefully places you in control of your finances – both now and into the future.

You will learn lifelong skills.
A peaceful divorce is all about compromise, communication and conflict resolution. When you choose this route over a costly, drawn out litigated divorce, you will learn these important skills that you can then use in every area of your life after divorce – from refereeing your children’s squabbles to dealing with a difficult coworker. You’ll also learn how to effectively work through problems with your ex so that when issues arise in the future, you’ll both be able to handle them maturely and amicably.

You’ll walk away with dignity and purpose.
It’s not just about right now – it’s your life after divorce that’s most important. When you make the conscious effort to approach your divorce from a standpoint of peace and compromise, your dignity will remain intact and you will be better prepared to heal and move forward with your life. The future is bright and promising, but if you view your divorce as a source of contention, you risk becoming trapped in the painful past.

Divorcing peacefully is something that just about any couple can (and should) achieve – even those that are high conflict. If you’re considering your options and need some support, we can help. Through a dynamic combination of mediation and divorce recovery coaching, you can effectively work through your differences, reach a settlement you’re both comfortable with and begin to move forward with your life after divorce in a positive way.

Source: equitablemediation

Porsha Stewart Speaks on Divorce & “Real Housewives of Atlanta

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:09:04 GMT

On the Real Housewives of Atlanta reunion last week, while defending herself and her marriage to former NFL star Kordell Stewart, reality star Porsha Stewart broke down and broke our hearts. She spoke with so much passion and conviction that you could hear the words getting stuck in her throat mid-sentence. Knowing that the couple didn’t make it, and that they were going through a divorce at the very moment that we were watching her defend her marriage in such a way, just made it even harder to watch. You could tell it was not made up for TV, and the audience realized that it didn’t matter if she felt that strongly for Kordell in the end, because it was over. Powerful stuff.

There was more to what she said, but you get the point. Porsha just gave”Hollywood Life” an interview about it, and she addresses reconciliation and how it feels to still be living in the house with Kordell. She also discusses the possibility of coming back to RHOA next season.

Source: majicatl

Divorce and pyschics

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:38:53 GMT

My girlfriends took me out to lunch on Saturday then dragged me along to a psychic. OMG I was "whatever". So we get there, and this woman sits me down and starts straight away:

You're changing jobs really soon (yes) and described my current job going away (yes) You're ending a relationship right now (yes). She went into detail about why and described my ex to a T. One amazing thing she said was "he didn't think you'd ever file and leave him". "He was shocked". "He really didn't think you'd do it".

She described his cheating and said it was because he feels he doesn't deserve to be loved (true). Described his family and the addictions and mental illness thereof (yes). She said what he did he didn't do it to make you leave but he's been testing your love. She said men like this, because they feel unworthy of love they test the ones the love them. She said nobody has ever loved my ex the way I did and nobody ever will. She said he is angry inside at his life. He hates himself.

She said he will try to suck me back in but resist, and keep going with the divorce. He will never change. She said he can't change, he was made this way by his family upbringing (yes). She said the third person (pregnant OW) - he will bounce back and forth with but it won't last. It will be short-lived.

She described my family, and said my mom was around me now and will be with me throughout this hard time (she died 7 yrs ago). She said my mom will come to me in my dreams. She said my mom loved me very much and is very proud of the person I am and the way I have lived my life.

Then she said 2 new men will come into my life later this year, I will get to know both but end up with the one who is an academic or consultant of some kind. We both love the mountains and lakes (I do).

She talked about my son and his disabilities and gifts. Said he is a wise old soul (yes he is). Anyway... I don't hold beliefs either way about this stuff but I did get emotional through some of her statements. I didn't volunteer info all she asked was my first name and birthdate. Its sort of weird she knew this stuff. Bizarre.

Source: talkaboutmarriage

Dying Woman Discovers 'Supportive' Husband Is Having an Affair

Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:15:41 GMT

Imagine you are dying. I know, not a pleasant thing to imagine, but imagine you've got a terminal disease and have about six months to live. However, your husband has been a godsend during this time -- supportive, caring, wonderful. You don't know what you'd do without him. Then one night (isn't that always the way?) an email comes to his iPad. You read it and realize he's having an affair. Do you confront him? This is the unbelivably agonizing position that a reader wrote to advice columnist Prudence asking about.

The terminally ill woman says that she wants to confront her husband -- but not for the usual reason. (I guess when you're dying, you don't have much time to hold grudges.) The woman wants to let her husband know she knows about the affair -- but only so she can forgive him! Yes, she wants to alleviate his guilt. (Assuming he has any.) She's also concerned that if her family finds out about his cheating after she's gone that they'll hold it against him, and she doesn't want that. Wow. Here the woman is dying, yet she's worried about her husband's emotional state! I don't know if this woman is a saint or a doormat.

Prudence (aka Emily Yoffe) suggests that the woman get therapy. Therapy?! Who has time for that with six months left? Unless the therapy is in Tahiti or some place the woman has always wanted to go to, that seems a grim way to spend your remaining months. Prudence also suggests that the gravely-ill woman hint to her family that she knows about the affair and is okay with it so they don't demonize her hubby after her demise. Yeah, that'll make everything cool.

A professional weighed in suggesting that the woman not confront her husband at all -- that instead she give him the "great gift" of not saying anything at all so that when the wife dies, he can continue a relationship with the other woman without feeling guilty about it. WTF? When did this all become about the husband?

Seriously, dude, your wife is dying. Maybe this is your way of coping (as another expert suggests), but she'll be dead in less than a year! Couldn't you "cope" with another woman after that?!

That said, nothing will be gained by being angry at the husband now and having her main source of emotional support taken from her. And who wants the last months of your life filled with gut-wrenching accusations and squabbling.

But I'm a firm believer that honesty is the best policy and there's no reason for this poor woman to keep her husband's secret. On the other hand, letting him know she forgives him might encourage him to spend more time with the other woman and less with his dying wife!

I think I'd ask him politely to put things on hold until my time on the planet was over. Maybe he'd listen, maybe not. But until the husband buries his wife, they are still married, and it would be nice of him to remember that for the small time they have left. Am I asking too much?! Anyway, if that doesn't work, I hope girlfriend has it in her to get out there and get some herself while she still can!

Source: thestir.cafemom

Commentary: Chasing Rochester’s most famous divorcee

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:32:05 GMT

There was a time when Rochester, N.Y., was the hometown of two of America’s most famous women. One was Susan B. Anthony. The other was once described by the U.S. attorney general as the “most dangerous woman in America.” President Theodore Roosevelt called her a “madwoman and a moral pervert.” In 1901, her hometown paper said that Rochester had “the melancholy distinction of being the home city of the high priestess of the cult of destruction.”

She was an avowed anarchist, bitter opponent of marriage, nearly indicted after the assassination of President William McKinley, jailed for advocating against the draft in World War I, an accomplished orator and author, hounded by the government for decades, the target of state and federal laws and eventually exiled to the Soviet Union during the Red Scare, later returning to condemn Soviet-style communism. She spoke and wrote Hebrew, Russian, French, German and English.

She had another, softer side, epitomized in her most famous quote: “If I can’t dance I don’t want to be in your revolution.”She was the most famous — some would say notorious — woman in the first half of the 20th century in the United States, eclipsing the nearly sainted suffrage crusader Anthony.

She is also the most famous woman to be divorced in Rochester: Emma Goldman. As a judge in the matrimonial part of the Supreme Court, I and my two co-authors set out to find the public records of Goldman’s marriage and divorce. The unfolding investigation led to an introduction to orthodox Jewish marriage ceremonies, changing state and federal laws in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, delays in recording of vital statistics in the late 19th century and, perhaps, an inkling that Goldman, for all her anarchistic tendencies, was actually as compliant as any daughter might be when the law required it.

Goldman arrived in Rochester in 1886 from Russia. In her autobiography, she described Rochester, the Flower City, as “bleak and cold” and said she “hated” her new home. “It was too provincial to permit an interesting life,” she later wrote. Her orthodox Jewish family settled on Kelly Street, amid the large Jewish immigrant population that arrived in Rochester after the Civil War.

When her sisters took her to a dance, she meet and fell in love with Jacob Kerschner, a fellow tailor. They were married in February 1887 in an orthodox religious ceremony. Congressional investigators later asserted that the Rev. Kalmon Bardin, a shochet or a religious official who oversaw the preparation of Kosher foods, presided. The actual ceremony was probably performed in her parents’ home on Kelly Street, near the current site of Fight Square. As part of the ceremony, Goldman would have been given a ketubah, an officially witnessed wedding contract.

In 1887, no ceremony was necessary for marriage in New York. Common law marriage — the parties married “merely by words of the present” — flourished and was not permanently abolished in New York until 1933.

New York recognized religious marriages. In Fenton v. Reed, 4 Johns 52 (Sup. Ct. NY 1809), the state Supreme Court suggested that a religious marriage — in facie ecclesiae — was enforceable in the state courts. The New York Court of Appeals had held that New York’s role in marriage and divorce was essentially founded on the equitable powers set forth by the ecclesiastical courts of England, Griffin v. Griffin, 47 NY 134 (1872); O’Gara v. Eiseniohr, 38 NY 296 (1868).

While recognizing religious marriages, New York did not, until 1880, require recording of marriages or divorces. A statute requiring recording passed that year but compliance by counties and cities was sketchy well into the early 20th century. While records at the Monroe County Clerk’s office reveal some marriages were recorded in 1887, Goldman’s is not among them. There is no record of her marriage in the City of Rochester, either.

The recording of marriages and divorces by local and state governments gained greater importance in the 1880s, in large measure, driven by the federal government. Federal Civil War pension benefits for spouses and orphans depended on verification of marital status and paternity.

In 1855, Congress allowed women who married United States citizens to obtain citizenship. The necessity of marriage records for immigration purposes and government benefits pushed states to require recording of marriages.

Kerschner, Goldman’s husband, received a citizenship certificate from the Monroe County Court in 1884. There is no evidence of Kerschner’s citizenship certificate in the county clerk’s office. But, nonetheless, he was a citizen, or so he — and Goldman — thought. Under the law in 1887, Goldman became an American citizen upon her marriage to Kerschner.

Goldman’s marriage dissolved quickly. Her husband was described as cavorting in card games and, as she described it in her autobiography, impotent.

Simultaneously she was radicalized by the hanging of protesters after the Haymarket massacre in Chicago in 1887. Unhappy at home, impassioned by the Haymarket massacre and having relinquished her job because married women were not permitted to work, she sought a divorce.

In the 1880s, Rochester’s orthodox Jewish communities permitted divorce, according to Rabbi Laurence A. Kotok, Temple B’rith Kodesh’s current rabbi. The process known as bet din, a Rabbinic Court, was, according to records, presided over by Rabbi Abraham Levinson, the chief rabbi at the Beth Israel Russian Synagogue.

The synagogue had built a new facility in 1886, later known as the Leopold Street Congregation. Rabbi Levinson later became the chief rabbi at the B’nai Russian Synagogue in Baltimore and his obituary in 1912 described, among his achievements, that he had presided over the Goldman’s divorce. The Leopold Street Congregation, a shining monument to the Jewish community in downtown Rochester, is still standing on Harrison Street in downtown Rochester.

Orthodox Jewish law required a three-member panel to grant the divorce. This writer could find no evidence of the divorce findings. The grounds for a divorce in 1888 were few in New York. In 1787, the New York legislature made adultery the first ground for a divorce. Later, separation was added in 1813 and annulment for “physically incapable of consenting” was added (among other grounds) in 1829. When Goldman sought a divorce, that was all the civil law provided. There is no record of her divorce in the County Clerk’s office.

After the divorce, Goldman was ostracized: Her own father, with whom she had a seemingly perpetual stormy relationship, virtually disowned her. As a consequence, she fled to Connecticut.

Within six months, Goldman returned to Rochester. In a seemingly inexplicable step, she remarried Kerschner in a second orthodox ceremony, in large measure, she said in her autobiography, because he threatened to kill himself if she refused to remarry him. But, as before, the marriage was not recorded and there is no evidence of it in the records of the state, county or city. There is no account of who performed the wedding or where it occurred. Under Jewish law, there would be no record of a religious divorce, according to Rabbi Kotok.

The remarriage was doomed. It lasted only a few months. Depressed, alienated and rejected, Goldman, then not yet 20, left Rochester. But, she was still married and there is no evidence of a divorce or even a suggestion of a divorce in her autobiography.

One thing is undisputed: There was no “equitable distribution” in 1888. When Goldman left Rochester, she took her one possession in the world — in 21st century terms, “her separate property” — her sewing machine.

After she left, she embarked on a career of writing and advocacy in the anarchist vein, founding Mother Earth magazine, writing extensively about how marriage was oppressive to women even though still married. She had affairs with other anarchists yet she never sought a divorce from Kerschner. As her fame grew, so did her new country’s desire to be rid of her. As part of its campaign against her, the United States repeatedly sought to strip her of the citizenship, which she argued she had attained through her remarriage to Kerschner.

Interestingly, Goldman could not apply for citizenship as a married woman: The law provided that her citizenship could only be derived from her marriage and her husband. An unmarried woman could apply but a married woman was denied citizenship if her husband was not a citizen, In re Rionda, 164 F. 368 (SDNY 1908).

After decades, the government finally prevailed. In 1909, the government brought an action in federal court in Buffalo to strip Kerschner of his citizenship, arguing he obtained his citizenship fraudulently. In what could only be described now as “due process oversight,” the government never served Kerschner with the petition and, in default, annulled his citizenship and with it, Goldman’s claim to citizenship through him.

The government claimed Kerschner was only 19 at the time of his application and had only lived two years in the United States. The presiding judge was District Court Judge John R. Hazel, the judge who, earlier in the decade in Buffalo after McKinley’s death, had sworn in Theodore Roosevelt as president and who obviously knew the connection between Kerschner and his wife.

A decade later, after Congress enacted statutes to permit deportation of anarchists, the government commenced an action in New York to strike Goldman’s citizenship. The then-newly minted director of the Justice Department’s Bureau of Investigation, J. Edgar Hoover, determined that Goldman’s husband, Kerschner, had lived in Chicago under an assumed name and had died in 1919. Unable to contest the government’s proof and bound by the earlier stripping of Kerschner’s citizenship, Goldman lost her hearing and was deported. In 1919, she was exiled to her country of birth, once czarist, now Soviet Russia.

But Goldman, despite her “free love” declarations, was not done with marriage. The Soviet Union expelled her in 1922. Despite her condemnation of the Bolsheviks, America denied her access to her adopted country. She went to England and married a Welsh miner and anarchist in 1925, even though she admitted she only saw him twice and never lived with him. She attained English citizenship and moved to Toronto.

Ironically, Goldman, despite condemning marriage in her writings as “a poor little State-and Church-begotten weed,” needed to be married throughout her career in order to secure citizenship. Simply put, marriage — despite her criticism of it — was her legal lifeline to a home.

In 1934, she returned to Rochester after having secured a visa under her new married name: Mrs. James Colton. She addressed a gathering of Rochester’s leaders at the City Club. Local newspapers remarked on the 65-year-old traveler:

The Rochester radical not only embraced the terrifying cult of anarchism but took provoking delight in the title of Red Emma. … shocking conservatives was her specialty. … some of the radical views of the Red Emma of a generation ago, which aroused the natives, now appear as shocking as the daring bathing suits of that time.

Her extended family remained in Rochester and she visited periodically. Her nephew was the famed violin virtuoso David Hochstein, who was killed in France in World War I — which his aunt Emma vehemently opposed. In his honor, his family endowed the Hochstein Music School. Meanwhile, Goldman continued her writing, campaigned in the Spanish Civil War in 1936 and eventually died in Toronto in 1940.

Our long search of Goldman’s marriage and divorce records in Rochester appeared futile. It appeared the canny anarchist left no records of her Rochester activities. But, I was wrong. She had a strong allegiance to her family, despite her writings against marriage. In 1909, her father died. His will was admitted to probate. The then Surrogate of Monroe County Seldon S. Brown issued a citation to Emma Goldman, one of Abraham Goldman’s heirs.

The famous anarchist did what compliant children do. Current Surrogate Edmund A. Calvaruso found a waiver of citation in the Estate of Abraham Goldman and, there, notarized in California on Jan. 25, 1909, is the signature of Rochester’s most famous woman in the first half of the 20th century: Emma Goldman.

She left her mark on America, its laws, free speech, politics, feminists, the labor movement and society but the signature of the “most dangerous woman in America” is dutifully filed in the Monroe County Surrogate’s Court.

Source: nydailyrecord

Critical Mistakes Women Make In Divorce

Wed, 03 Apr 2013 09:54:44 GMT

The word "divorce" echoes in the ears of woman and shatters her life completely. This word itself turns her world topsy-turvy, especially on the emotional front. In such highly emotionally volatile situations a woman is bound to do some major mistakes that will make you repent forever. It is time to pick up the pieces, and face the situation in a better way. Look at it from a different angle. Divorce is not always the end of life. In fact, it can open ways to a lot more opportunities. Think about how your life is going to shape up post divorce. Think from the financial point of view, especially if you are dependent on your husband.

Things to Remember
The first thing every woman should understand is that they need to be in the best financial position post divorce and this is exactly what will make their life better. Keep a Check on Your Social Media: Watch out your statuses on facebook, other social media and check out whatever you are texting as well. Remember, all such stuff will be scrutinized by the divorce team of your husband. It would check each and every minute detail using a microscope and use it as an evidence hoping to bolster your husband's case. Updation of status, online photo albums, comments, etc. on social sites can be effectively used to contradict the statements made previously. It can act as a tool to prove infidelity, emotional imbalance, drug/alcohol abuse, assets mishandling, etc. Though the situation of divorce might emotionally drain you, do not ever make a mistake of turning to another boyfriend for help to cope up with this condition. In fact, this can worsen the situation.

Avoid Shopping: Surely, to get out of a bad mood, many women tend to relax and chill themselves out by shopping. But, you should restrict it. You should not "get back" your spouse by spending your marital assets and increasing your debts. You can spend it only after the divorce procedure is completed.
Be Aware of Your Finances: Gain knowledge about all marital assets including your pensions, retirement investments, life insurance annuities, etc. Similarly be aware of your liabilities and debts as well.

Try to find details if your husband is trying to hide some income, assets. Make sure you understand the difference between marital and separate property. Anything that you have acquired during and after marriage is marital property, including the gifts exchanged between the partners. Do not fight to keep the house, especially if it is a paid off house, outwardly it may seem to be a tempting deal, but be alert you will need to pay utility, maintenance costs, taxes, etc. Review the tax returns, income verification, investment accounts, credit card statements, etc. Make sure you make a wise decision by consulting a certified divorce financial analyst. Get guidance to settle down with the best divorce settlement that would stay ahead of time. Do not mix your emotions whenever you are handling a financial matter. Be as hard and strong as you can, so as to achieve the best possible outcome. Make sure your future is financially secure.

Responsibility of Your Children: Your kids are already going through a tough time. Do not put undue pressure on them. Do not pressurize and try to alienate them from their father as it may hurt them emotionally. Instead, try to encourage them to meet their father, and in this way they will always be on your side. These are some of the things that you need to take care of. Develop a solution that will make you financially stable for the rest of your life and try to begin your life in a new way.

Source: articlesbase

Yemen's youngest divorcee says father has squandered cash from her book

Tue, 02 Apr 2013 08:08:58 GMT

It's been five years since Nujood Ali became known as the world's youngest divorcee after escaping the man who bought her as a child bride aged nine. The story of Nujood's marriage and subsequent court victory was turned into a bestselling book, bringing hope to thousands of Yemeni brides forced into marriages they are too young to understand or consent to.

The royalties from I Am Nujood, Age 10 and Divorced were supposed to pay for the girl's schooling and allow her to follow her ambition to become a lawyer. Instead, Nujood says, the money has been squandered by her father – who has now sold her younger sister to a man twice her age.

"My father has spent all the money on getting married twice again," she says, fidgeting nervously, her fingers stained with henna. Now 15, she still finds it difficult to talk about her marriage and ex-husband. "He now has four wives, 14 children and learnt nothing from my experience. He gives me between $20 [£13] and $30 a month for pocket money."

Nujood's ordeal began when she was married off by her father at nine, for a dowry of a little more than $750, after her future husband, Faez Ali Thamer, promised not to have sex with her "before the year after she has her first period" – as required by law in Yemen.

But what followed was a cycle of sexual and physical abuse, starting on her wedding night. Two months later, during a visit back to her family home, she took the unprecedented step of running away and asking a court for a divorce on grounds of abuse.

The case was the first of its kind in Yemen and attracted so much attention that the court's security described the hearing as a "mob scene". Both Nujood's father and husband were briefly imprisoned during proceedings, after colluding to lie to the court about the girl's age.

The book of Nujood's story was ghostwritten by Delphine Minoui and published in France. It was translated into 16 languages and sold in 35 countries. Publishers Michel Lafon agreed to pay her father, Ali Mohammed al-Ahdel, $1,000 a month until she was 18 to support her upbringing. It also bought a large house for the family in Sana'a, and set up a fund paid directly to a school for her education.

But Nujood says she has been forced out of the home and has not received any of the money being paid to her father. She said her father had rented the first floor of the house to another family, and moved his new wife into the second. "I've been asked to leave and have to stay in my older brother's cramped house."

Listening carefully in the corner of the room is Haifa Ali, Nujood's younger sister, who recently became engaged to a man she does not know. "I don't want to get married," Haifa says. "I'm very scared, because the [dowry] money has already been paid and I want to continue my education."

Haifa is cut short by Nujood, her anger overcoming her shyness. "I won't let it happen to her," she says. "I will speak to as many journalists and lawyers as possible about this. It is illegal."The girls' father refused to speak to the Guardian, but the book's publishers say they are trying to rectify the situation. "We are unable to pay Nujood directly legally in Yemen due to the law and it is at times exceptionally difficult to know what is going on from France," said Margaux Mersie of Michel Lafon.

"The problem is that al-Ahdel's position is upheld in Yemeni law. There are plenty of judges who support him and are unsympathetic [to Nujood]."Nujood's attitude is best summed up by her reaction to being granted a divorce. She still wishes to study in England and become a lawyer. "Compared to dreams, reality can be cruel," she said. "But it can also come up with beautiful surprises."

Source: guardian

Children of Divorce More Likely To Leave Religion? It's Not That Simple, Study Says

Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:01:38 GMT

New research from professors at Baylor University suggests prior studies purporting to show a link between divorce and children's religiosity as adults may be overstated.

The link may exist, says Baylor assistant professor of sociology Jeremy Uecker, but previous research has left out or downplayed key factors that may be more relevant to an individual's faith experience than the role of divorce itself.

According to Baylor, the link between divorce and religion mainly occurs because children of divorced parents are more likely to be "separated from one of their parents, and parents are usually considered the primary source of religious training for children."

But other factors within the church itself, such as stigmatizing a single mother or the "logistical difficulty" of attending, may cause a child of divorce to resent or drift away from God.

CT previously has reported on the topic of divorce and how it impacts children when parents split. CT also noted the release of a study emphasizing the important role of ministry to non-traditional families.

Source: blog.christianitytoday

Divorcee claims man promised marriage to rape her

Mon, 04 Mar 2013 18:01:17 GMT

A 28-year-old divorcee has lodged a rape complaint after a man allegedly promised her marriage to have sex last year but later tied the knot with another woman. Santacruz police arrested Raghuvir Rajput on Wednesday from his residence near Shastri Nagar in Santacruz (West). He works in a private firm and was allegedly depressed over the past few years.

Police said his mother Krishna (50) used to take tuition of the victim's nephew. Last year in March, she sought the victim's hand in marriage for her son. Sub-inspector Ashok Salunkhe said the victim's family did not agree as her divorce formalities were yet to be completed.

Meanwhile, Raghuvir and the victim, who stay in the same locality, allegedly fell in love. The woman alleged he took her to several hotels in October and November last year and had intercourse promising marriage. "On January 3, Raghuvir married another woman and broke off his relationship with the victim. His younger brother threatened the victim with dire consequences Monday after she confronted Raghuvir," said Salunkhe. Raghuvir was produced before a court and remanded in police custody till February 25.

Source: indianexpress

Divorce and the Child Dependency Exemption

Sat, 02 Mar 2013 15:11:37 GMT

Just what should we more traditional trusts and estate practitioners be telling our family law colleagues about the child dependency exemption so that they can make sure that settlement agreements and divorce decrees have language that the IRS approves? To add insult to injury, in some cases divorce not only causes stress up to the time of the divorce, but also results in continuing stress, particularly when there are minor children and the parents must continue to interact.

The IRS simply does not want to be entwined in these often negative interactions. So, rules set forth in §152(e)(2)(A) must be followed or the IRS will not allow a noncustodial parent a child dependency exemption: the custodial parent must sign a written declaration (as prescribed by the Secretary) that the custodial parent will not claim the child as a dependent and the noncustodial parent must attach that declaration to his or her income tax return for that year. These are, apparently rather black-and-white rules and getting close does not work.

In Armstrong v. Comr., 139 T.C. No. 18 (2012), despite a rather persuasive dissent, joined in by two other Tax Court judges, the majority (eight in total) refused to allow the taxpayer to take a child dependency exemption in the following circumstances. The custodial parent was the ex-wife. A May 2003 arbitration award, a June 2003 state court order, and a March 2007 state court order directed that taxpayer, the noncustodial ex-husband, was entitled to the child dependency exemption. The March 2007 state court order required the ex-wife to execute IRS Form 8332, "Release of Claim to Exemption for Child of Divorced or Separated Parents," provided taxpayer pays child support (though the earlier orders did not mention Form 8332). He did so through 2007, but his ex-wife never signed Form 8332. (The current form does contain a Part II entitled Release of Claim to Exemption for Future Years and a Part III Revocation of that release; the 2003 form had the release of claim for future years, but not the revocation.)

After remarrying, taxpayer filed a joint 2007 return with his wife and attached the May 2003 arbitration award. The IRS audited them. Taxpayer provided the 2003 and 2007 child support orders - and the ex-wife had signed the 2007 child support order. (There is a suggestion that the ex-wife signed Forms 8332 for years prior to 2007, but not after the taxpayer remarried.)

The majority held that the 2007 state court order, even though signed by the wife, did not comply with §152(e)(2)(A) because it did not "unconditionally declare that the ex-wife `will not claim such child as a dependent'" for the year at issue. The deficiency and accuracy-related penalty were not large enough to justify the cost of going to Tax Court ($1,510 plus $402), so one can only assume that the taxpayer was greatly annoyed with his ex-wife and sought justice from the IRS. Taxpayer and his wife represented themselves. Taxpayer did not achieve justice, though the majority did hold that he was not liable for the penalty.

Why did the majority hold against taxpayer? Presumably because the IRS does not want to be caught in the middle on issues like this: "The IRS's Form 8332 provides an effective and uniform way for a custodial parent to make the declaration required in section 152(e)(2)(A) for the benefit of the noncustodial parent. But a noncustodial parent like Mr. Armstrong may also rely on an alternative document, provided that it `conform[s] to the substance' of Form 8332. … [A] court order that has been signed by the custodial parent may satisfy section 152(e)(2)(A) as the noncustodial parent's declaration if the document `conform[s] to the substance" of Form 8332." There must be an unconditional statement that the custodial parent will NOT take a dependency exemption for the child. See Gessic v. Comr., T.C. Memo 2010-88; Thomas v. Comr., T.C. Memo 2010-11; Boltinghouse v. Comr., T.C. Memo 2003-134; and Horn v. Comr., T.C. Memo 2002-290.

The court noted that as custody and support orders get amended over time, "the Internal Revenue Service cannot be expected to police divorce decrees and separation agreements or determine taxpayer compliance therewith." See Gessic. The court writes that the taxpayer's case is sympathetic, but, nevertheless, it must follow the applicable statute.

What should family lawyers do to ensure the child dependency allowance for a client who is entitled to it under the divorce decree? Based on this case, the taxpayer must seek state court enforcement of the provision and leave the IRS out of the mix. For example, the state court could require the custodial parent to sign IRS Form 8332 for all future years allowing the noncustodial parent to claim the child as a "dependent child," and providing that if the custodial parent unilaterally revokes that waiver, then damages for revoking the waiver will include, if that parent is later found to have revoked the waiver without justification (for example, all support payments are up to date) or that parent agrees that he or she should not have revoked the waiver, all income taxes and penalties that were paid as a result of the waivers, reasonable attorneys' fees to enforce the state court's order and reasonable attorneys' and CPA's fees for claiming a refund. The court order could also be signed by the custodial parent and contain language similar to that found in IRS Form 8332 to the effect that the custodial parent will NOT take the child dependency exemption. And, if the non-custodial parent who is entitled to the exemption cannot obtain a signed IRS Form 8332 with a cordial request, consider asking a state court to order the custodial parent to sign IRS Form 8332. If the custodial parent does not do so, a contempt of court order may be in his or her future.

Source: bna