Skip to content
  • Maryland
  • Virginia
  • Washington, D.C.

Divorce Lawyers

Thyden Gross and Callahan LLPCounselors and Attorneys at Law

301-907-4580

 

Maryland Divorce Legal Crier

News and comments about divorce, child support, child custody, alimony, equitable property distribution, father’s rights, mother’s rights, family law, laws on divorce and other legal information in Maryland.

Archive for May, 2012

Maryland Voters to Decide Same-Sex Marriage Issue

Wednesday, May 30th, 2012

Matt Bush reports for WAMU that groups opposing the new same-sex marriage law in Maryland have collected 113,000 signatures calling for the measure to be put on the ballot in November.

This is more than twice the number needed to force a referendum on the law.

The new law legalizing same-sex marriage does not go into effect until January, so no same sex marriages will be performed in Maryland before the voters decide in November.

Court Approves Same Sex Divorce in Maryland

Friday, May 18th, 2012

The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled today that a same-sex couple, lawfully married in another state, could obtain a divorce in Maryland, even though Maryland law prohibits same sex marriage within the state.  The Court based its decision on principles of comity, which recognizes the lawful actions of other states.  Port v. Cowan (2012)

Husband Forgets to Update Facebook Status

Friday, May 18th, 2012

Today Facebook launches its highly anticipated IPO.  So naturally we wanted to bring you a Facebook divorce story.

Laura Weisman reports in the San Francisco Chronicle that a woman in India has filed for divorce because her husband had not updated his relationship status on Facebook.  He was still listed as “single instead of “married”.  He says he was distracted with family and business and forgot to change it.

The couple had an arranged marriage just two months ago.  The judge has ordered the couple to undergo counseling over the next six months.

Apparently, there are several cases in India where spouses in arranged marriages have asked the court to divorce them on flimsy reasons, such as who makes the tea or failure to take an in-law’s phone call.

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Alimony

Wednesday, May 16th, 2012

This infographic is courtesy of Saffery Champness, an independent top 20 firm of chartered accountants with nine offices across the UK and offices in Guernsey and Geneva.

inforgraphic

No Negative Marital Property

Monday, May 14th, 2012

Barbara and Michael married in 1970 after graduating from Boston College.  They moved to Columbia, Maryland, where Michael got a job as a mathematician for the Department of Defense.   They had two children.  Michael left his government job for a lucrative position in sales for a computer company.  The couple lived off their income and invested Michael’s bonuses.

After 12 years of marriage, however, the parties encountered marital difficulties, and separated.   They divorced in 1984.

One of the issues in their divorce involved the valuation of two of their investments, namely limited partnership interests in real estate ventures.  The managing partner testified that one of the investments was worth about $50,000 and the other was insolvent and owed more than it was worth.  The court valued Michael’s share of the first partnership at about $11,000 and the second partnership at a negative value of approximately $15,000.

This was erroneous the Court of Special Appeals ruled.  The trial court has to value each item of marital property separately and there is no provision in the statute for deducting a loss on a bad investment from other marital property.  Therefore, the court could not assign a negative value.  The lowest value marital property can have is zero.

Green v. Green, 64 Md. App. 122; 494 A.2d 721 (1985)

Debtor’s Prison

Friday, May 4th, 2012

“If your guy doesn’t pay his alimony, we’ll file a motion for contempt and you can tell him we’ll be asking for jail time,” said Sobel, who was representing the ex-wife.  He didn’t like the ex-husband’s attorney, Caster, ever since he had yelled at Sobel and hung up on him in another case years ago.  Sobel had a long memory.

“Come on, Sobel,” Castor said.  “The judge is not going to put my guy in jail.  It’s contractual alimony, not court ordered alimony.”

“Whadya mean, Castor?  The Agreement is incorporated into the Divorce Decree.  That makes it a court order.  And your client has failed to comply with it.”

“Well there is no imprisonment for debt in Maryland.  Check the state constitution, Sobel.”

“You check it, Castor.  I’ve got it right here.  Section 398 of Article III says ‘No person shall be imprisoned for debt, but a valid decree of a court of competent jurisdiction or agreement approved by decree of said court for the support of a wife or dependent children or for alimony shall not constitute a debt within the meaning of this section.’

“Sobel, me and my client will, as they say, see you in court.”

“Tell your client to bring his checkbook or a toothbrush, Castor, for when he goes to the slammer.”

 
© 2018 Thyden Gross and Callahan LLP. All rights reserved.