Is there a better state for men divorce? I am currently overseas and will be returning to the state of my choosing soon. I need to get a divorce and don't want to land in a man hating state. I have 3 kids and have been married for 9 years. I'm the higher income earner since she refused to work and since I work from home I do the parenting too. It's important I at least get 50/50 of my kids.
General Considerations While I am not convinced that this question isn't proper for this site, I don't think that, for the most part, it has a clear and simple answer. Also, strictly speaking there is no such thing as a &quot;man-hating state&quot; because de jure distinctions based upon gender in divorce law are constitutionally forbidden. But, that doesn't mean that some states don't have laws that are usually more favorable to a typical man than others. For example, there is meaningful variation between states in the law of maintenance (a.k.a. alimony) that favor the more or the less affluent spouse, although less than you might naively expect. Interstate Differences There are a handful of states that are quite distinctive. For example, in the states where I am licensed, New York State was the last state to have a &quot;no fault&quot; divorce option, which could help you or hurt you depending on the circumstances as judges there still have a mindset that fault matters, and Colorado has some distinctive rules related to presumptive maintenance awards, to non-parental custody claims, and to the treatment of property received by gift, or inheritance or owned prior to the marriage. But, most U.S. states are very similar on most important issues, particularly on matters of child support (where federal welfare regulations create strong incentives for states to have almost uniform laws) and parental rights and responsibilities (where the &quot;best interests of the child&quot; standard is almost universal with only slight differences in case law). Every state now has a &quot;no fault&quot; divorce option (and most completely disregard all forms of marital fault in making their decisions) and most states afford judges in divorce cases very wide discretion on issues of property division and maintenance. There are differences between states regarding the legal standard for dividing property in divorce (some states are &quot;community property&quot; states, some are &quot;quasi-community property&quot; states and some a separate property states each of which have detailed rules that matter in some states). But, it also isn't uncommon, for example, to divide property acquired in a community property state according to the community property rules of the state where the property was acquired rather than the property division rules of the state where the divorce is taking place. The differences tend to be greatest in situations where there is substantial property owned by a spouse that was owned prior to the marriage or was received by gift or inheritance, particularly in a long marriage. There are also some states that have more specific rules governing maintenance awards (a.k.a. alimony), but the majority rule affords a judge immense discretion in making maintenance awards. So, often the tradeoff is not so much between a more favorable regime and a less favorable regime on the merits, but between a more predictable regime and one with a greater range of possible outcomes, even though the outcome in the average case may be very similar. Sometimes very fine details can really matter (often much more than &quot;big picture&quot; issues that are used to classify state divorce law regimes). For example, some states use the economic circumstances of the parties on the date that the divorce is filed to make decisions on property division and maintenance, while others use the date of the divorce hearing. If your family's economic circumstances are in rapid flux, either up or down, that difference could be huge in your particular case. And, incidentally, there is nothing inherently pro-husband or pro-wife about either rule. One rule might favor men with rising fortunes, while another might favor men with falling fortunes. Intrastate Differences Are Mostly More Important Than Interstate Differences For the most part, however, the differences in typical outcomes between particular judges and particular geographic regions within a state are more important than the differences between states. This is also why you should usually ignore anecdotal evidence you hear that is usually specific to a judge in someone's case, rather than having much to do with the law of a particular state. Your mileage will vary. Judges in affluent counties, for example, may be more inclined to think that a higher alimony award is necessary to maintain someone's standard of living, but may also be more sophisticated on average, in understanding assets like ownership interests in closely held businesses or complex financial instruments, that may be unfamiliar to judges in less affluent counties. Divorce cases in counties that are growing rapidly in population typically take longer to process cases than in counties that have stable or declining populations, because the number of judges assigned to a county typically lags behind changes in population, and judges with larger case loads only have so many days a year upon which they can hold hearings. There are some counties in Colorado where you can get a two day divorce hearing six months after the case is filed and others where you can expect a two year wait for a two day divorce hearing, due to differences in local caseloads. Particularly in &quot;best interests of the child&quot; determinations, the outcome is inevitably influenced by the personal life experiences of your particular judge and two different judges in the very same county could easily come up with radically different decisions based upon precisely the same facts. Some of this, on average, is influenced by regional culture. For example, an average judge in rural Alabama may have different ideas about the best interests of the child, than an average judge in Seattle, Washington. But, your case wouldn't be in front of an &quot;average judge&quot;, it would be in front of one particular judge. It is entirely possible, for example, that your rural Alabama judge spent most of his life in Seattle, was chosen to serve as a judge because there were no other qualified lawyers who wanted the job in that rural county, and has views about what is in the best interests of a child that are very different from the &quot;average&quot; rural Alabama judge. In general, judges in rural areas are more urban in their sensibilities and more secular in their world views than the general population (per a survey of rural judges I saw in print form and no longer have an easy way to cite). How To Evaluate Your Options As a practical matter, the best approach for someone in your situation is to identify several different particular places you might choose to move (down to the particular county level), and then talk to lawyers in each to evaluate your likely prospects in light of the facts of your particular case. While a lawyer licensed in only one state is generally not forbidden from comparing the law of multiple states by the laws of professional responsibility, the practical reality is that few lawyers have the kind of expertise necessary to do so on a national basis. You might find a lawyer near a state boundary who is knowledgable, for example, about the differences in the divorce laws between New Jersey, New York and Connecticut that are all present in the same metropolitan area. But, there are few lawyers personally qualified to make meaningful and accurate comparisons between, say, Georgia, Maine, North Dakota, Texas and Idaho. Your Attitude Towards The Process Matters Finally, one sentence in your question really sticks out: &quot;I need to get a divorce and don't want to land in a man hating state.&quot; So does your statement &quot;It's important I at least get 50/50 of my kids.&quot; These sentences reflect a somewhat cynical and self-centered attitude towards divorce law and the divorce process, in general, which is quite common among men contemplating a divorce, and which almost always receives a negative response from judges, no matter which county they serve. If a judge sniffs a hint that you think that the process isn't fair, or if a judge discerns that you care more about what you want than what is best for your kids and fair for your wife, almost every judge in every jurisdiction will burn you. If a judge gets any sense that you have that kind of attitude, you are almost certain to have a worse result in almost all matters in which the judge has any discretion, which is almost all of them in a case like yours. UPDATE July 9, 2019 To Address Additional Sub-Topics: Two areas where there are significant differences in the law between states are how infidelity is treated legally and how marital agreements are treated. Heartbalm Lawsuits One quite important issue in a handful of outlier states is the existence or lack thereof of heart balm lawsuit such as lawsuits for &quot;alienation of affections.&quot; These are lawsuits by a spouse against someone having an affair with that spouse (usually as satellite litigation parallel to a divorce). As explained here (with further sources at the link), as of 2010: [I]n fiscal years 2000–2007, there were an average of 230 alienation of affections filings in North Carolina per year — a bit over 0.5% of the number of all divorces. The tort is also recognized in Hawaii, Illinois, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah, but it seems to be often litigated only in North Carolina and (to an apparently smaller extent) in Mississippi[.] Prevailing parties have won hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. These states also frequently allow the consideration of fault in making economic decisions in divorce cases as well (although the &quot;best interests of the child&quot; standard is the norm even in these states). The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to declare these actions unconstitutional on several occasions (usually be simply denying certiorari in cases well suited for addressing the issue). Most other states have abolished these lawsuits, and in Colorado, it is actually a crime to try to file one in its courts or to attempt to secure a settlement of such a case. In a case where infidelity is at issue, this factor can be a very significant one. Choice of law issues (i.e. determining which cases are and are not, for example, subject to the North Carolina alienation of affections tort in various complicated fact patterns with some in state facts and some out of states facts), can be very tricky, however. I am certain that this is still good law in North Carolina and Mississippi, but the status of these lawsuits in other jurisdictions may have changed in the last decade. Criminal Adultery Statutes [In] Virginia, as in 22 other [states] including Massachusetts, adultery remains a criminal act, a vestige of the way US law has anchored legitimate sexual activity within marriage. In most of those states, including New York, adultery is a misdemeanor. But in others — Massachusetts, Idaho, Michigan, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin — it is a felony, though rarely prosecuted. In the armed forces, it can be punished severely, although usually in combination with greater wrongdoing. In nearly all the rest of the industrialized world, adultery is not covered by criminal code. From the Boston Globe crediting the New York Times (November 15, 2012). As of 2019, only 19 states have criminal adultery statutes as several states have repealed this statutes since 2012. In the context of a divorce in a &quot;no fault&quot; divorce state (all states have &quot;no fault&quot; divorce, but some also have a parallel fault based divorce system or allow consideration of fault in economic decision making in the case) where there has been infidelity this creates the tricky situation where the divorce court may not consider adultery in making its decisions, even though that conduct is a crime (and sometimes even a felony) in that state. Generally speaking, these statutes are vary rarely actually prosecuted despite the fact that the &quot;crime&quot; is fairly common and is reported in those states more frequently than you would guess, as a matter of prosecutorial discretion, and generally speaking, it is not possible to prosecute this crime without the approval a prosecuting attorney who is a government official responsible to an elected official, usually a county attorney, district attorney, or state attorney general. But, the mere fact that conduct is a crime can influence how that conduct is treated in a civil case. Pre-Nup and Post-Nup Recognition The are modest differences in the extent to which different states will treat a prenuptial agreement or a post-nuptial marital agreement as valid (and there are also differences in how individual judges evaluate their state's legal standard). In a case where one of these is allegedly present this could be quite significant. For example, in some states, a marital agreement is presumptively invalid or conclusively invalid, if it is not in writing and does not have a certification from an attorney representing each party and other disclosures mandates by statute. In other states, the requirements for a marital agreement are only slightly heightened relative to an ordinary contract between strangers, although most require them to be in writing and screen them for signs of &quot;undue influence&quot; in persuading a &quot;poor spouse&quot; to give up important rights. A few states even honor oral agreements between spouses entered into before or after the marriage, if they are proven with sufficient specificity and convincing enough evidence. No states that I am aware of allow for decisions relating to child custody to be made in a marital agreement, as void because a key party (the child) does not consent to it, and do not allow the grounds for a divorce to be changes except through a &quot;covenant marriage&quot;. Most states (but not all) do not allow valid marital agreement to contain rights that depend upon marital fault. States also vary in the extent to which arbitration clauses in marital agreements (such as an agreement to submit a divorce to a Jewish rabbinical forum for arbitration) are honored. There are also choice of law issues with regard to all of these questions. Some states will apply the law of the state where the agreement was allegedly entered into in order to determine its validity, while other states will simply apply forum state law to evaluate that question regardless of where it was executed because the forum state has jurisdiction over the couple and the marriage at the time of the divorce. Neither approach is forbidden by the U.S. Constitution. Covenant Marriage Three states also have what amounts to a marital agreement since it customizes the obligations of marriage called covenant marriage that basically limits divorces to either fault based divorces or &quot;no fault&quot; divorces with much longer waiting periods than usual. Covenant marriage is a legally distinct kind of marriage in three states (Arizona, Arkansas, and Louisiana) of the United States, in which the marrying spouses agree to obtain pre-marital counseling and accept more limited grounds for later seeking divorce (the least strict of which being that the couple lives apart from each other for two years).... Despite the goals of covenant marriage proponents, in the three states with covenant marriage statutes, only an extremely small minority of newlyweds has chosen covenant marriage. In Louisiana, between 2000 and 2010, only about 1 percent of marrying couples chose a covenant marriage, with the other 99 percent choosing to marry under standard marriage laws permitting no-fault divorce. In Arizona, estimates of the rate of covenant marriage among new couples range from 0.25 percent to 1 percent. In Arkansas, a similarly very small number of couples choose covenant marriage. Covenant marriages are not necessarily recognized outside covenant marriage states, making these limitations, in practice, easy to circumvent by moving to a new residence across a state line for a short period of time. This is one of several reasons why they are not popular options for newly marrying couples.
Mary has two options (that are not mutually exclusive). The stronger one is to file for divorce immediately and obtain an injunction against this activity in that case. In some states (e.g. Colorado) an injunction takes effect the moment that divorce papers are served upon a spouse. The weaker one is to ask the divorce judge to allocate the value of the imprudently spent funds to Bob in the division of assets. The doctrine that allows the judge to do this even in a state that otherwise has only "no fault" divorce, is often called "economic waste" or "economic fault." The same doctrine applies, for example, if one spouses destroys valuable property of the other out of spite.
It's basically a question about the rules of court. While I can't say for sure about this case, a scheduled court date that isn't canceled, even in a stayed proceeding, is to be held. Non-appearance of a party or their representing lawyer is a bad idea as it might incur contempt of court. Such a court date can be used to (once more) inform the court and other parties of the stay. Paperwork that might have been delayed in postal service is then given over under the eyes of the judge, pretty much ensuring that the other parties did get them and nobody may cry foul play. Possibly the meeting can be used by the attorney to reschedule other court dates or depositions if the stay has a specific time length. Also note, that not all stays are for the whole case but might only rule to stay parts of it: a divorce case that includes a case for visitation of a child might stay the visitation part till a related case about where the child will live in the future is solved, but continue on the parts that try to sort out the divorce itself. Such non-stayed proceedings do proceed even under the stay of some others.
Of course The prosecution just needs to prove that the crime happened (or the defendant believed it to have happened) and you helped (in brief, there will be specific elements of the crime that each need to be proved). This would be easier if the primary crime had a convicted perpetrator but it’s not impossible without. Allow me to illustrate with an example. I will set out facts which are somewhat contrived and would not be so clear cut in a real case but for the purposes of the example please take them as undisputed and fully supported by evidence. John and Jill are in a relationship. This relationship is well known to be argumentative with frequent shouting matches and one or the other storming out. This does not amount to domestic violence by either party. John's friend Alan believes (wrongly) that there is domestic violence. During an argument Jill drops dead of a heart attack. John rings Alan distraught and says "I've killed her." Alan assumes (wrongly) that John has murdered Jill. Alan says "i'll take care of it. You go to your dad's". Alan (alone) disposes of the body. John is not guilty of murder (or indeed, anything). Alan is guilty of accessory to murder even though the actual crime never happened. The fact that Alan believed it happened is enough.
This is a civil case, taking away your freedom is only for criminal offenses. Not paying your bills is not a criminal offense. It is up to the creditor to look for your assets, etc. A court can make you show up and answer questions about your assets and income. While you are in court the judge can make you give your gold watch to your creditor. Outside the parameters of the question there are circumstances like failure to pay child support when you do have the funds that can lead to incarceration. In some places you can be jailed for contempt of court if the court requires your presence to let the creditor have the ability to try to get access to your assets and you do not show up.
When you get married is possible to have contract renouncing both parties right to a divorce. No. That clause would be redundant, materially indistinguishable from breach of contract, and otherwise unenforceable. It is redundant because the legal definition of Marriage (Black's Law Dictionary) states that it is "A contract, according to the form prescribed by law, by which a man and woman [...] mutually engage with each other to live their whole lives together in the state of union which ought to exist between a husband and a wife". Thus, the perpetuity as expressed in the term whole lives preempts the conceiving of an eventual separation. Insofar as marriage is legally cognizable as a contract (see legal definition), it might specify or imply remedies in the event that one or both spouses decide(s) that substance of marital relationship no longer exists; that is, in the event that a breach of that contract occurs. A court may order to the breaching spouse performance of certain acts (for example, alimony) in accordance to statutory law or common law. However, a prohibition to divorce goes beyond the scope of what is legally permissible. The U.S. Supreme Court in Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 617-618 (1984) helps explaining why a prohibition to divorce would be unenforceable: "In one line of decisions, the Court has concluded that choices to enter into and maintain certain intimate human relationships must be secured against undue intrusion by the State because of the role of such relationships in safeguarding the individual freedom that is central to our constitutional scheme. In this respect, freedom of association receives protection as a fundamental element of personal liberty." If that is not possible how much can you limit the right to a divorce with a contract or something similar? There is no possible limit or requisite duration of a marriage, as that would inherently infringe a person's fundamental element of personal liberty mentioned in the Roberts case.
I was initially going to vote to close this as a political rather than a legal question, however, I think there is scope for separating out the two dimensions. Our society makes a distinction between children and adults by giving them different legal rights, obligations and protections. If you think about it, there are a lot of things beyond sexual activity where the law does this: voting, drinking, military service, compulsory schooling, legal culpability etc. What things are subject to legal restriction is a political distinction. Now, there is no reason politically why these laws could not have been drafted to say "children can do this, adults can do that" and leave it to the courts to decide who is a "child" and who is an "adult". Biologically and emotionally people reach maturity at different ages so this is perfectly sensible. It might even be more just. However, justice is only one thing that we require of our legal system. Among the others are certainty and efficiency. Providing a bright line based on birth date gives certainty. Not requiring the court to deal with this on a case-by-case basis increases efficiency - justice is not free. This is why jurisdictions use age as a proxy for adulthood. As to why they choose any particular age, that is a political question.
That is, if my mom is sued by somebody for some reason, does that mean I am being sued, and my personal assets are at risk, rather than just hers'? Having power of attorney doesn't mean that you become "one and the same" person, it just means that you can stand in their place legally. If somebody sues your mother, you are authorized to act on your mother's behalf, but that doesn't mean that you are liable for any judgement. Of course there is a fiduciary responsibility to act in your mothers best interest, and violating that can open you up to suits that you are responsible for (because the suit would be against you, not your mother). And, what if she runs out of money, would I be personally financially liable for covering her expenses? No, you wouldn't be. Debts would be settled the same way as if she didn't have anybody acting as PoA. She (you) could declare bankruptcy on her behalf and have the debts discharged. This doesn't obligate you to pay them. And then, what if I simply don't have time to deal with her affairs, that is where I am being put in a position where I have to choose between keeping my job and my personal relationships at home versus going to deal with things over there, would having POA force me to do the latter? This is a personal decision for you. You could alternatively pursue having her declared as an "adult ward of the State". You need to consult a lawyer if you take on full power of attorney, to both protect you, your assets, and your responsibilities. This is something that you really need a lawyer to draft so that the lines are clear, and the expectations are as well. You may need to get a court involved if she is not of clear mind to sign these papers.