Thursday, June 23, 2005

Dissolution as to status only

I just got a proposed court order from my wife's lawyer. Besides 6 other pages of inaccuracies, it says:
Status Only Dissolution:
A. The Court finds there are irreconcilable differences leading to the irremediable breakdown of the marriage, and orders a judgment of dissolution to issue as to status only.
She submitted this to the judge for signature, as part of a "Findings and Order After Hearing -- May 13, 2005".

If this is correct, then the judge has already dissolved our marriage. Or maybe it will be dissolved when the judge signs the order, I don't know. But what does "as to status only" mean? Am I married or not?

If I am out on a date, and a woman asks me if I am married, shall I say that am divorced as to status only?

I guess she wants to legitimatize her sleepovers with the boyfriend and continue to litigate child custody and support issue, but she would be doing that anyway.


Masculiste said...

What this means is that you are officially divorced, but ONLY the issue of divorce has been resolved.

All other issues of equitable distribution of marital property, (that's the one where they really try and scalp you) or issues of alimony, chid support and POSSIBLY custody issues (contained within the equitable distribution spectrum) must still be resolved.

The plan for your ex now is to drag this process out as long as possible, to hopefully force you to be more pliable to some outrageous settlement demands they probably intend to propose.

George said...

You mean I'll be officially divorced as soon as the judge signs the order? Ok, that makes sense.

I still don't understand whether I need to sign anything to complete the dissolution. Earlier, my wife's lawyer implied that I did, but her draft order implies that I don't.

Masculiste said...'ll receive a certificate of a bi-furcated divorce to match the written court order.

The problem is...if you're paying what's known as Alimony Pendente Lite, or temp alimony, along with your child support (which is nothing more than PAYMENTS that are now ALLOCATED from your original spousal support order, which initially is all-emcompassing) you'll most likely be forced to continue to...

USUALLY when a divorce is final, all other issues are resolved right along with it, ie. divorce decree and resolution of marital property issues, child support and custody issues. Subsequently those APL payments stop and you're only required to pay child support.

What MY ex did was claim property issues in her 'answer and new matter' and then do EVERYTHING possible to delay the entire procedure so she could retain the APL payments as long as humanly possible. After almost 4 years, when I had to force a divorce the hard way, her and the judge stepped in and declared it bi-furcated. She didn't even ask for it, the judge just gave it to her. And get this...

APL and alimony payments MUST be included as income for tax purposes, but she, her lawyer and the judge KNEW that she had never claimed those payments as income...

It boggles the mind, doesn't it?

The benefit to your ex and her atty agreeing to a bi-furcated divorce means that she still has property issues she wants resolved, and until they are, you're still required to pay the APL until those issues ARE resolved. At least that's how it worked in my case.

George said...

The court seems to want to decide custody, then money, and then divorce. But it doesn't really work that way. My wife wants money while the custody is pending, and she wants to sleep with her boyfriend without being an adulterer. It seems to me that the court should have dissolved the marriage a year ago.

Masculiste said...

You're doesn't work that way. My ex didn't care about being an adulteress, and neither did the court.