Child support and spousal support can be challenging financial responsibilities to deal with for those who have gone through a divorce. In some cases, financial strain can lead to the inability to meet one's financial responsibilities to a former spouse and one's children, which can then result in a court issuing an order for garnishment of earnings.
In recent posts, we've been speaking quite a bit about prenuptial agreements, particularly about their usefulness in divorce, provided they are wisely negotiated and properly executed. To understand the usefulness of prenuptial agreements in divorce, it is helpful to have a basic understanding of the default rules for property division in the state of Arizona, since these are the rules that apply in the absence of an agreement to the contrary.
In a previous post on this blog, we wrote a post dealing with the topic of when prenuptial agreements can be set aside in the state of Arizona. As we mentioned there are two primary situations where this can happen: when a party to the agreement did not voluntarily sign the agreement; and when a party to the agreement didn't have sufficient knowledge about the other party's assets and liabilities. A prenup can also be set aside when it is not executed validly, which is more of a technicality.
Child support is a real burden for many divorced parents in the United States. This is particularly the case among low-income families. Unfortunately, failure to pay child support can lead to serious consequences of the delinquent parent. Fortunately, some noncustodial parents are able to obtain relief through a modification of the child support order when circumstances have changed enough to warrant a modification.
When many people think of prenuptial agreements, they assume they are only useful to those who are wealthy and stand to lose a lot in divorce. While it is certainly true that prenuptial agreements are in greater use among the wealthy, such agreements can certainly benefit those of more modest wealth.
Prenuptial agreements are an important tool couples can use to protect themselves from financial loss in the event of divorce. As we've mentioned previously on this blog, though, it is important to take care when negotiating and drafting these agreements to ensure everything is done correctly. A careless prenuptial agreement won't do a couple any good and will only result in unnecessary costs and court appearances.
In our last post, we spoke about the grounds on which prenuptial agreements can be invalidated in the state of Arizona. As we mentioned, there are two basic grounds for a finding of invalidity. One is when a party did not voluntarily enter into the agreement. The other is when the agreement is fundamentally unfair and a party was not provided adequate information about the other party's assets and debts.
In divorce, there can be disputes over many things, including the family home, specific items shared by the couple, child custody, spousal support, and so on. One of the items that is becoming more and more an object of dispute are family pets. This makes sense, being that family pets often involve deep sentiments.
In a recent post, we wrote about the ongoing divorce case of Ken Griffin, founder of the hedge fund Citadel. One of the big issues in the divorce is a prenuptial agreement between Ken Griffin and his wife. She, as we noted, has asked that the agreement be thrown out because she was coerced into signing it and because it is unfair.
Under a new ruling from an Arizona Court of Appeals gives judges the ability to enforce child support orders from other states, reversing a previous ruling that Arizona law doesn't allow for modification of child support orders from other states.
In our last post, we wrote about a recent Arizona Court of Appeals ruling which permits enforcement of out-of-state child support orders. The ruling, as we noted, was based on the fact that enforcing an out-of-state child support order would present the kind of confusion modifying an out-of-state order would. It is modification of child support orders, then, that is the real problem.
For some people, entering into a second or third marriage is not the stressful event that it was the first time around. Having been through the process before, it makes sense that there would be less anxiety about the unknown. Still, this should not stop remarrying couples from evaluating their financial situation and taking appropriate steps to protect themselves.
Alimony is only one issue among several that are dealt with in divorce, and it is often handled close to the end of the process. Because of this, it is not always clear how alimony will be decided in divorce cases. What is particularly unpredictable is the length of time for which alimony will be awarded. As a recent TIME article points out, in cases where lifetime alimony is awarded, there are often strong feelings of resentment and injustice.