Tag Archive for: Marriage

Victimhood Has Currency

/in , , , /by

Most people spin conflict so that they are the victor or the victim. Here’s why it’s important to keep that instinct in check.

The legal community focuses heavily on the topic of domestic violence with continuing legal education seminars and pro bono clinics. There is even a specialized court called the IDV court (integrated domestic violence), where the family law cases that have alleged elements of domestic violence are adjudicated.

Abuse comes in many forms – emotional, physical, sexual, and financial. Courts take abuse into consideration and use it as a factor in equitable distribution and spousal support, often increasing the amount of money an abused party will get. So, there is monetary compensation for it.

There is a case J.N v. T.N., in which the abuse was found to be so grave, the court awarded the abused party 85% of the marital assets. The case can be found here: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2022/2022-ny-slip-op-22310.html. See also, DRL Section 236(B)(5)(d)(14), which can be found here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/DOM/236.

Abuse is also an obvious factor in custody determinations, as logically, children should have measured and protected engagements with an abusive parent. Trouble comes, however, when one party exaggerates or fabricates allegations of abuse to gain monetary and custodial advantages. The irony being that such a party abuses the abuse claim as a punitive and self-enriching weapon.

For example, conjure the not uncommon case of a wife calling the police on her husband, purely as a child custody tactic. In doing so, she thinks she can get the upper hand by forcing the creation of a police record for her husband – all without thinking of the implications. The wife here is so blinded by her personal ambition of gaining full custody that she fails to see the bigger picture – that her husband would get fired if there was any hint of an abuse allegation in his private life. Whether or not the allegation was true, the allegation’s mere existence was a glaring indelible black mark against him. What she thought would help her in her custody case turned out to be a very silly move for the financials. Since her ex is now unemployed and virtually unemployable at the level of income he was making at a top bank, she is limited in the support she can get. Moreover, because the court felt her call to the police was disingenuous, she ended up being penalized on the custody front.

Everything done in divorce has a cost-benefit analysis. As highlighted above, when vindictive parties are too myopic in their strategy, they end up losing on multiple fronts.

One of the consequences of the victimhood claim is that it often keeps very unhappily married couples married.

I have seen many situations where a theme of the marriage is – “You are the reason for all my unhappiness and misery, and if we get divorced, I will make your life a living hell.”

The party being blamed chooses to stay in the marriage because they view this as a real threat. Despite their misery, it is a misery they know and have lived with for years, which to them, beats the unknown behemoth of misery their spouse vows to ascend on them if the parties divorce.

I often get postnuptial agreement inquiries from this category of married couples.

To learn more about how genuine and fabricated abuse allegations can impact marriage and divorce, contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Title Doesn’t Matter

/in , , /by

In marriage, title doesn’t matter. Titles to houses, cars, accounts and businesses can all get overridden by the statute and court system in a divorce.  

I often do consultations where people say things like, “I’m married, but we keep everything separate.” They operate under the assumption that, because each party has assets in their own name, it’s separate property under the law. They think that the default in a marriage tips to individual title, and that the only things that are jointly owned are whatever has been purchased jointly and/or is held in joint names – unfortunately for them, this is a gross misconception. 

Everything purchased during the marriage is presumptively marital property, regardless of title. The burden of proof is on the person who wants to prove otherwise. 

For example, someone might purchase a property in their separate name during marriage. However, title in their sole name doesn’t matter. The overriding presumption is that everything purchased after the date of marriage is marital property. 

Inheritance is, by definition, separate property. That said, if someone uses their inheritance money to purchase a property that they put in their separate name — and then they use money earned during the marriage to pay towards the equity and the principal on the mortgage — then that person has commingled and made a portion of that house marital property. 

Businesses are handled a bit differently. When it comes to businesses, the titled spouse does get a leg up, and the non-titled spouse is typically entitled to smaller percentages than other aspects of equitable distribution, such as accounts, that weigh in favor of 50/50 splits. Non-titled spouses typically get approximately 5% – 33% of the value of the business interest, and where they fall on the spectrum and whether the court would go outside of this most common range is based on the direct and indirect contributions each spouse has made to the business. Let’s say a husband has a contracting business in his exclusive name, as appears on the corporate and business documents, his wife is presumptively entitled to a portion of the business, even though she is a non-titled spouse. 

Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements offer a means to explicitly delineate personal separate property from joint marital property. Their flexibility allows us to go above and beyond what the law provides and create unique solutions that make sense for the situation. 

To learn more and appropriately protect your rights and interests, contact us.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

When Your Spouse Is Gay

/in , , /by

Most people who find out their spouse is gay think they’re facing a unique situation — but, realistically speaking, there are a lot of LGBT+ people who have gone the traditional way of marriage and starting families. Many of them are near retirement age and got married when the world was a less tolerant place. 

While each situation is different, in my practice, divorces where one spouse is gay tend to be more amicable as an overall generalization, with there being some highly contentious ones every now and again. There’s oftentimes already a deep attachment and an understanding in place that they were never going to have a conventional marriage. They created a different kind of life together, and now they have to untangle it. 

That mutual respect is why so many couples like this are more inclined to mediate their divorces. In many of my cases, the person who is not gay is attached to the one that is, and the person that is gay usually does not want to be harsh. I have also had experiences where the couple tries initially to mediate, or resolve the situation amicably, and they end up litigating. That can happen for a number of reasons, including the non-adversarial setting of mediation, which has been known to make financial manipulation more likely to occur. 

Within the various religions, one party being gay may present seemingly unsolvable problems in a divorce. Oftentimes, religions bring with them a culture that involves every member of a multi-generational family. Some religious communities have their own systems of dealing with marriages and divorces. Information that is private in the secular world is everyone’s business in small communities. Because of that, couples may work out an agreement in which they are divorced in everything but name — unless the parties are completely willing to be open and potentially jeopardize some of the relationships with their family members, including parents, siblings, uncles still moored in more traditional and less accepting dogmas.

In many of these cases, the non-gay spouse did have suspicions over the years that their spouse might be gay. A lot of times, it was chalked up to depression, the gay spouse exhibiting behaviors such as being withdrawn, detached, and lack of interest in sexual encounters with their spouse. The reality is the gay spouse is often depressed if they feel trapped in a marriage with someone of the “wrong” sex who they lack sexual interest in and are often conflicted about how to handle their situation — do they stay out of a sense of loyalty to their family or do they go out of a sense of loyalty to their true innate nature. So, for many, getting that divorce is important to their continuing mental health.

To get started, contact me.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Divorce Inertia

/in /by

Many of the people who have filed for divorce during the lockdown or are going to get divorced or separated once life returns to the “old normal” are not doing so exclusively because of issues that arose during the pandemic. Most are people whose marriages were already on the rocks — but were staying together because of inertia. The pandemic simply served to accelerate the expiration date on what was already a flailing or dead marriage. 

Why is it that some people would “sit on” a divorce until something counteracts the inertia? Finding that out is why part of my basic consultation is to ask, “Why now?” The answer will, to some extent, formulate the strategy of the case. 

For example, I am working with a man who came to me wanting a divorce after being separated for 20 years. I asked him, “Why now?” He said, “Because I’m bored.” He just needed a project to keep him busy! This was the first time I’ve ever heard someone give boredom as an answer, and he was being completely honest. More common responses to “Why now?” include:  an exacerbation of verbal or even physical aggression, including an inability to control arguing in front of the children; loss of sense of self within the marriage; disliking the personality traits one’s spouse brings out in them; lack of intimacy for an extended period of time that someone can no longer handle;  finding another lover that hones in feelings of loneliness within the marriage; economic incentive, such as financial advances that one does not wish to share with their spouse, among many other reasons.  

From an economic standpoint, inertia can have dire consequences in situations where it is necessary to move quickly to protect separate property. There are situations in which a person needs to take immediate action — like if the person wants to start a business or is about to come into a very large amount of money that they don’t want to share with their soon-to-be-ex-spouse. 

So, while the pandemic does not appear to be the cause of many divorce cases, it seems that it has often been the impetus. Perhaps it’s because people have time to think about what they want to do after this situation is over — and one of the things people think is, “I don’t want to live like this anymore.” Sometimes when someone is sick, restricted and/or experiencing loss of control over their lives, they realize life is short, that they want to make a change once they recover and regain a semblance of control. These and/or other factors might create the perfect storm for feelings to bloom for other people, and for the parties of a loveless marriage to overcome inertia.

Regardless of what your turning point was, getting started early will pay dividends in terms of both time and money. It will also place you in a strong position, able to react decisively to any obstacles that pop up. To learn more, contact me.  

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

YOU ARE NOT THE PERSON I MARRIED

/in /by

Basic Second Law of Thermodynamics is that things gradually fall apart — into a state of disorder and disrepair. As powerful as gravity, the overwhelming force of the world’s natural tendencies is hard to beat. 

It is no surprise that, as humans, we too peak in our state of optimal growth and then our systems, more often than not, decline. Most people expect this to happen, but way down the line, in some fuzzy distant future. However, life does not always follow the script and premature illness is challenging to grapple with. 

Classic wedding vows include “in sickness and in health;” there is this overriding expectation that spouses can stand by each other through the most vulnerable times, but not everyone can or wants to stay in a marriage that goes from friend, companion, and partnership to caretaker when their spouse’s health turns south during what may be the “prime” years of their lives.

“Superman,” aka, Christopher Reeves, was a famous case of caretaking by a spouse. Michael J. Fox has been very open about his Parkinson’s and remains married throughout his ordeals. The much beloved novel from the 1970’s by Erich Segal, “Love Story,” portrayed a strong love in the midst of a wife dying of cancer; but, not all marriages unfold this way in the face of illness or disability; not all spouses feel so committed, love to this degree, or can handle their spouse’s ailments. 

I have seen a full spectrum of reactions to a spouse’s illness in the face of separation and divorce from exceedingly collaborative and amicable to vicious and hostile. The former instances include extending as much time as needed to the ill spouse to acclimate to the idea of divorce; agreeing to pay well above the statutory maintenance guideline amounts to comfortably support an ill spouse; living under a separation agreement for an extended period of time rather than finalizing a divorce so the ill spouse can remain on the other’s health insurance plan, which separation allows for but divorce bars; proceeding with a divorce but agreeing to pay the permitted 3 years of COBRA for dependents to allow the ill spouse to have continued health insurance for at least that duration of time; and agreeing to remain married for a minimum of ten years so the ill spouse can collect off the other’s social security, which is permitted once couples are married for ten years.  

On the litigious end, I have seen a husband and father who left his cancerous wife, subpoena his only child, an adult son, who had moved in to his mother’s house to help her while she had cancer; the husband’s agenda was to impute his son’s income to his ill wife, so that he wouldn’t have to pay her maintenance. 

More of these “cheery” stories include a husband who stayed with his ill wife, with whom he had two children, for years but had a long term extra-marital affair that fostered additional children, who he funneled more money to than to his wife and children of the marriage. He said his wife’s progressive illness killed any semblance of what he wanted and needed out of a marriage, but that he felt too guilty to leave her while his children with her were growing up. He commenced a divorce action when his children of the marriage were grown, but they were onto him, and it became a case of children against father. The children were actually attorneys, and they pieced together that their father had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on his “other” family. They were intent on getting the best deal they could for their mother to compensate her for all the marital money their father had spent on the other woman and children in his life. For better or worse, this man was not a sympathetic character before the presiding judge, who practically forced a very harsh settlement deal down his throat in open court.  

Often when someone can’t handle their spouse’s illness, they stay out of guilt, fear of a protective relative, or because of perceived obligation, but eventually check out. They feel like a prisoner to their relationship and are often resentful. 

Both the healthy and ill spouses in these instances are sympathetic in different ways and require strong advocacy; they suffered enough, and until we walk in another’s shoes, it can be difficult to pass judgment on their actions and decisions.

Please contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any questions.  

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylstein

What’s Mine Is Mine, And What’s Yours Is Ours

/in /by

While courtship is premised on a showering of gifts and benevolence to one’s partner, being a tightwad and hoarding for one’s self often signals the beginning of the end. No surprise.

Money can often end up becoming the main source of tension within a marriage, ultimately leading to a divorce.

I recently had a case where the husband, a sophisticated, forward-thinking man well into his 50’s, could not stop talking about his bar mitzvah. In his youth, he was one of those entrepreneurial kids who was always engaged in business ventures, ranging from corner lemonade stands to snow removal. He proudly accumulated money and saved it in an account together with his sizable bar mitzvah (quite large from generous family and friends), birthday, and special-occasion gift money. When he married, he chose to make this account the primary marital account, commingling the funds with money he earned while he was married and third-party gift money he received during the marriage.

His wife operated under an alternate paradigm where she very carefully kept her premarital accounts separate.  When she received sizable inheritance and gifts from third parties during the marriage, she placed the money in her premarital separate accounts, maintaining their separate property integrity status.

The husband felt they were a team and everything he had was dibs to all. The wife felt that way about her husband’s money but not her own. She reasoned that the husband was the mutually agreed upon primary supporter and his job was to support the family. However he managed to come up with the money, she really did not care, so long as it supported the family and she did not have to worry about it. She rationalized that her role of primary homemaker came with its own responsibilities and stresses, and her husband should not be dependent on her premarital, gift, and inheritance money; she did not want to share it.

Because money is fungible, the husband lost out on any separate property money credit due to his commingling, while the wife preserved hers. The wife operated under a classic “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is ours” prototype.  

This is a bit like a chicken and egg situation. Did the wife begin to see that the marriage was going south and consult with a matrimonial attorney at some point to learn how to keep her money separate? Or was it the fact that she seemed to have an attitude of selfishness that ultimately led to the divorce? As stated from the beginning, money issues are often a major component of marriage breakdowns. The husband described himself as feeling like a cow towards the end of his marriage, being milked for his paycheck, his wife being disinterested and dismissive of him for all other purposes. Interestingly, they got along and saw eye to eye in many other respects, including sharing most larger-scale values and child-rearing approaches.

In long-term marriages, some believe that at the end of the road everything should be thrown into the marital pot and split equally; that if they spent that many years together, we’re partners, and complemented each other’s roles in many respects, the notion of separate property should be washed away, regardless of the statute’s letter of the law definitions and classifications. This is a common approach in highly cooperative mediation cases. However, don’t bet on it, as it is the minority approach.

Feel free to contact us with questions regarding separate and marital property classification, appropriate planning, and protection mechanisms.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Are You an Innocent Spouse?

/in , , /by

One of the benefits of marriage is being able to file joint tax returns with a spouse. However, marriage brings a double-edged sword. On the one hand, spouses reap the benefit of being able to collectively have more money to live on if they’re drawing from the same pool during their marriage and maximizing their tax benefits. The downside, though, is when the spouse with no knowledge of marital finances signs off on tax returns and it later comes to bite them. Often the spouse in control of the finances just tells the other person to sign, because they’ve waited until the 11th hour to file, and have no time for explanations or mincing meat.

Every now and again, a spouse will even sign the other spouse’s signature, which often comes out during the divorce. I’ve had a few clients over the years that said their spouse signed for them, but when I’ve dug deeper, that client has told their spouse to sign for them if they ever needed to.  

In one classic situation, the wife asked for child support and claimed that her husband made $600,000, but the joint tax return showed that collectively they made $180,000. In this case, the husband said that she signed to that amount and should be held to it for child support calculations, thereby imposing a significantly lower child support obligation on him. The wife claimed that she didn’t know what she was signing. She simply believed and acceded to him. Of course, assuming the wife knows basic math, she would know she was living on $600,000, rather than $180,000.

I recently worked on a divorce case, where the wife signed an addendum to the couple’s prenuptial agreement, executed many years ago, that gave the husband carte blanche discretion and authorization with regards to filing their joint tax returns; akin to a power of attorney relating to their taxes. This is an extremely bright and savvy woman — starry eyed in love, in her youth, with who she thought was an incredibly charming millionaire; her romantic notions and desire to be taken care of created thick naïve glasses through which the reality was obscured, and she trusted him wholeheartedly. Years later, his macho charade started to unravel, and IRS letters claiming tax evasion and liabilities exceeding 15 million dollars started to pour in. After her initial shock and numbness, she ran for cover under the safety haven of “innocent spouse relief.” See IRS Publication 971 and IRS Form 8857 (Publication 971;  Form 8857.pdf).

In these case, I’ve looped in accountants, tax lawyers and forensic experts, if needed, to provide the necessary perspective, releases, and maximize the relief to the client. It becomes very interdisciplinary, and a team of professionals who work well together and communicate fluidly, efficiently, and effectively, while also communally keeping an eye on the client’s pocketbook and spending is key.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Divorcing Jekyll and Hyde

/in /by

When a disorder, such as Borderline Personality Disorder, becomes well known and filters into mainstream vocabulary, all of a sudden, laymen are diagnosing each other with it at the drop of a hat.

Obviously, a lot of divorcing couples paint their spouse with such labels, even though the person may simply not be handling the divorce well. When the average person undergoes an extreme stressor, such as an unraveling marriage and divorce, it makes sense that they may go a little haywire.

I have had clients tell me their spouse has borderline personality disorder, but when I dig deeper, it seems that the only person their spouse has difficulty with is them.

Borderlines have an overarching pattern of troubled relationships shadowed by explosive and uncontrollable anger. They have difficulty maintaining friendships, in general. If my client admits that his or her spouse, who acts erratic and unpredictable with them, is close with their immediate family and has good friends, in all likelihood, they are not borderline, but rather unhappily married and targeting their frustration at their spouse.

When there is mental illness, however, it can be problematic – mental illness typically limits a person’s coping skills.

In the case of Jekyll and Hyde personalities, you could question what came first – the chicken or the egg? Are people with specific personality disorders more prone to getting divorced? If one person’s emotional problems take up the whole room, how can they sustain a relationship?  

Spouses can feel like they’re walking on eggshells around someone who is volatile. The person could be charming and spirited, but once you get to know them, they’re stressful to be around. They become easily unhinged, and you never know when or what is going to set them off.

When couples divorce and a custody trial ensues, a parenting analysis is done. This analysis includes determining which parent is more attuned to their childrens’ needs. I’ve participated in cases where both parents are compromised – one may have Borderline Personality Disorder and the other is Bipolar. In this case, we’ll do a comparison between the two to determine which one is higher functioning and better equipped to deal with the childrens’ physical, emotional and intellectual needs.  

Even though we try to be settlement oriented, we often have to litigate. In these situations, attorneys have to reveal what’s going on for their client and provide examples to the court. In domestic violence cases, attorneys need to show exactly how their client is the victim of coercive control and abuse, which many times goes hand in hand with the perpetrating Jekyll and Hyde personality type.

Attorneys need to help their clients recognize that they can only control themselves, not their ex-spouses. They should also try to help their clients have insight into their own behavior and learn to modify it and not necessarily react to the other party’s provocations, especially in custody cases, where the parties have each other in their lives at least until the childrens’ emancipation.

Feel free to contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

When Love and Marriage Don’t Go Together like a Horse and Carriage….What’s Left?

/in , /by

Marriage is inherently deemed an economic partnership, according to the law, and upon its dissolution, the accumulated assets and interests are to be distributed on the basis of the economic needs and circumstances of the parties.

Equitable distribution in New York is fact specific, and not a 50/50 split, like it is in the community property states, such as California, Arizona, Nevada, and Alaska. (There are 9 community property states in total.) Much is left to judicial discretion in this neck of the woods. Both parties contributions as spouse, parent, wage earner or homemaker are accounted for. The court possesses flexibility and elasticity to mold an appropriate decree, because what is fair and just in one circumstance may not be so in another.

With regards to equitable distribution, we look closely at that economic partnership, splitting interests when there are both direct and indirect contributions made to the titled spouse by the non-titled spouse. These details will oftentimes determine how much is allocated between the parties. If there were many direct or indirect contributions made by the non-titled spouse, that could give a lot of weight to how much is paid to the non-titled spouse in the equitable distribution payout.

Marriage is like being on the clock. It is “marriage time,” like punching in and out of work, with the punch-in time being the date of marriage and the punch-out time being the date of commencement of a divorce action for active assets, and date of trial for passive assets. When you sign up for marriage, your financial actions are accounted for, and there is to be a reckoning with your spouse. A large part of the marriage (contract) is a financial contract with your spouse, and whether or not you understand the provisions and their ramifications when you take those marriage vows, you are bound by them. All time you spend during the marriage may be accounted for and “billed,” so to speak, in the final pay-out equitable distribution awards.

Arguably, this result may be inherently unfair from the get-go if you consider that most people don’t read the Domestic Relations Law, Family Court Act, General Obligations Laws, enter into a prenuptial agreement, or consult with a matrimonial attorney prior to marriage, so they are clueless as to the full breadth of the financial picture and often make erroneous presumptions. For example, many people presume that money they put in their separate titled accounts during marriage is separate property, which is incorrect. All income earned during marriage is marital income, so if spouses put their incomes into separate titled accounts, rather than keeping that money separate, they are commingling their separate account and presumptively turning everything in that account into marital property – the exact opposite result they intended.

Another counterintuitive consequence and irony is that many people’s performance tanks during a bad marriage. A non-titled spouse may be requesting and entitled to equitable distribution for their contributions when the titled spouse may feel that all their spouse did during the phases of a distant or rocky marriage is hamper their performance and growth, and that their growth would have been exponentially greater without their spouse and his/her claimed contributions.

The hoi polloi are entering into marriage contracts without understanding the basic principles of the contract, and later claiming that they did not understand the contract is not a valid defense. If you are old enough to get married, you are supposedly mature and responsible enough to avail yourself of this information and plan your finances accordingly.

It would be a leap to evoke the phrase “The Follies of the Masses,” but as matrimonial attorneys and mediators, we urge people to educate themselves about managing their finances prior to marriage, and if that time has passed, much may still be salvaged. I have married people asking for consultations all the time to realign their finances and understand the financial blueprint, for example, prior to one spouse opening a business, assuming a large debt, receiving an inheritance or personal injury award or liquidating untainted premarital property towards purchasing a jointly titled home, all of which are opportune times.

Feel free to contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

The Nurse with a Purse and Sugar Daddy Dynamic

/in , , /by

The idea of a “sugar daddy” is very common and well-known: A “sugar daddy” is an older man who marries a younger woman and takes care of her. There is a similar, but lesser-known dynamic when the older marrying spouse is a woman. This dynamic has been referred to as the “nurse with a purse.” In both cases, it’s equally important for the older spouse to obtain a Prenuptial Agreement.

Often, the woman in the “nurse with a purse” situation is in her 50s or older, highly capable, financially comfortable, healthy and has been married before; she is typically either widowed or divorced. Many — although by no means all — women who are in these circumstances come from traditional or religious backgrounds that particularly value marriage. They may feel like outcasts in their communities and immediate social circles when they are single. When they finally meet a suitor for marriage, their overwhelming relief often makes them walk on tippy toes, feeling they have little leverage to impose the contingency of signing a prenuptial agreement on the marriage. They are afraid of offending and warding off their prospective husband. They may also be more idealistic and resistant to believe that divorce can happen.

In this situation, when the woman remarries, she pays the bills and household expenses. After say — an eight-to-ten-year marriage — that ends in divorce, she often ends up completely depleted financially because the man is not well or is, for some other reason, monetarily dependent on her. The woman often has to assume more of a caretaking role. In such marriages, the woman may get very little from the relationship in terms of actual emotional support, friendship, and household help; literally, the only thing she may get is a man by her side and the status of being married. Several of my clients have fallen into this category and described these exact sentiments to me.

When the woman and her husband end up in divorce, it can have devastating financial consequences. The woman may have her own children she is trying to put through college and is carefully allocating her resources. There is an adage: “As long as you are young and healthy you can generate more money.” However, these women — who are often in their 50s and 60s — cannot generate more money that quickly. They are at the end of their working years. It is very debilitating to them to see that much money wiped out at the time of the divorce in equitable distribution and maintenance payments, as well as litigation expenses.

It is more common for sugar daddies to assert themselves pre-marriage and demand that a prenuptial agreement be signed, while women have a harder time finding their voice on this point and asserting themselves.

If you are remarrying and want to protect your assets both during your marriage and in case of divorce, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
Offices in Manhattan and Brooklyn
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

New York Is a Melting Pot: Know the Culture You’re Working With – Part 2

/in /by

“Home is where the heart is” is a lovely, flowery, figurative expression that surely makes sense and resonates. However, on a very fundamental level, home is made of bricks and mortar. It is the basic foundation of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, where we can cohabitate and be physically protected from the external elements.   

Nearly all emphasize strong family connections, and many exhibit multi-generational homes with pooled resources and shared responsibilities, spanning two to three living generations under one roof or within close proximity.    

Such living arrangements cast a widespread shadow over a couple’s marriage and divorce. 

There is the meddlesome in-laws scenario, where a couple cannot evolve into their own matured, intimate, and trusting entity, because there is the incessant, intrusive third wheel of one or both of their parents sticking their noses in. Such parental behavior is often enabled by the adult child, who has great difficulty cutting the umbilical cord; it debilitates grown, married children and prevents them from being able to think for themselves and make their own decisions, together with their spouse, without constantly conferring with their parents and getting their parents’ approval.  

A client from a tight-knit Russian-Jewish background dreaded and delayed going home every night, because he did not want to be coming home to his mother-in-law’s constant badgering. He could not get his wife to divorce her mother, so he finally ended up divorcing his wife, whom he liked. 

Another culturally embedded younger couple was on the verge of divorce, largely due to the wife’s mother’s intrusiveness. With the help of a skilled family therapist, the couple moved to a different area, an approximate 1.5 to 2-hour drive from the maternal grandmother, and they were able to develop as their own marital entity and work things out. 

An additional influencing factor is the way larger family structures share and pool resources. Monies and resources received by an adult child can then be imputed to that adult child or otherwise accounted for to compute their basic child support obligation and statutory add-on expenses:

•As for basic child support, if a divorcing parent is living rent-free at their parent’s house and receiving many other paid benefits from their parents, a judge may decide to impute some/all of the monetary value of those resources to the divorcing parent for child support calculations; it is within judicial discretion, and there is supporting case law for this position.

•If funds for the children’s religious private schools are paid for by a set of grandparents year after year, a judge may impute that money to the divorcing parent and take it for granted that those funds will be forthcoming and accessible to them moving forward. 

•Childcare is an add-on that is allocated pro rata, pursuant to Domestic Relations Law Section 240 and the Family Court Act section 413–the applicable statutes. In the subject homes, a grandparent or aunt living under the same roof as the divorcing parent or nearby is often the built-in babysitter, negating the need for childcare. A parent can then say, rather than paying their pro rata share towards add-ons, they will use their mother as their babysitter/nanny. This is a sound and sensible position a party may take.     

The sale of the house/marital residence is typically zoomed into full focus at the time of divorce, and much attention needs to be paid to the details. Most commonly, when divorcing parties jointly own a marital residence, they agree that the primary residential parent (still, traditionally, the mother) shall be able to reside in the residence, together with the children, until the youngest child is 18 years old, at which time the residence may be sold and the net proceeds of the sale appropriately allocated between the then divorced parties (this may be many years post-divorce). 

Muslim clients have relayed that this simply does not work for them; that their (often ivy-league educated, high-income-earning professional and well able to support themselves) adult children live with them until they are married, often well into adulthood. They are not willing to sell the house when the youngest child turns 18. This is not exclusive to Muslims; other religious and traditional groups have similar protocols. 

Critical details such as these permeate and interlace themselves throughout the divorce negotiations. The right balance must be struck for the specific clients at the table; not some generic notion of what the “Apple-Pie” American family looks like. The parties’ culture may put limitations on their options when negotiating a divorce settlement. 

These clients do a balancing act and straddle the world of their immediate nuclear religion and culture and American culture. When servicing them, attorneys and mediators should be flexible enough to dance their dance and maintain proper footing and balance, while always using the law as a backbone and basic foundation.

Feel free to contact me with any questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
Offices in Manhattan and Brooklyn
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com