UPDATE: Steve Nash has a court battle ahead of him — and not one that involves basketball
Los Angeles Laker and former Phoenix Sun Steve Nash has a family law battle on his hands. Nash, who lives in Los Angeles, is contesting his ex-wife’s request for the court to grant her permission to move from Paradise Valley, Arizona to Los Angeles with their three children (though there have been rumors for years as to the paternity of the youngest child). Nash alleges that his ex wants to move to California because the state would afford her more child support. Alejandra Amarilla Menrath, the mother of his children, alleged that Nash currently did not pay child support and wanted to avoid having to under California law. Nash did, however, pay an undisclosed amount in spousal support to Menrath, and he pays for his children’s education and healthcare.
The legal standard that the court will use in this case is the “best interest of the child” standard. It will look at factors regarding whether a move to California would be in the Nash children’s best interest. Nash stated that the children were doing well living in Arizona and being close to his parents. Menrath countered that she wanted the children to be closer to their father and that the distance was difficult for them. The court likely will analyze both of these arguments in weighing which scenario would be more ideal for the children. The court may also consider whether Menrath’s request is being made in good faith or for financial gain.
UPDATE: Yesterday in court, Nash testified that he planned to return to the Phoenix area following the final two years on his contract. This may explain why he wants his children to remain in Arizona.
Big Bang Theory Star Mayim Bialik finalizes her divorce from husband
Today is a sad day for Blossom fans of yesteryear (I proudly own up the the fact that I had a collection of hats like those the main character of the show donned). Mayim Bialik and Michael Stone are finally divorced. Their home state, California, is a community property state. If you need a refresher on how community property jurisdictions work, check out this previous blog post which touches upon it.
I applaud the now former couple for working together to coparent for their two sons. The law can only govern so much — estranged couples have exclusive jurisdiction over how they will deal with the emotional aftermath of their separations and divorces.
Delaware’s legistlature passes same-sex marriage law
Delaware now joins the ranks of other states legalizing gay marriage. They will convert existing civil unions into marriages. Even though the new law does not give same-sex couples any more rights than they had under the previous civil union laws, for some, it is about being viewed as equals with heterosexual couples.
I am interested to see how the Supreme Court will deal with the LGBT cases before it. They are known to throw some curve balls one way or the other.
The ring, apparently, meant a thing to her — can NFL star’s ex-fiancee keep her 10 carat rock after breaking off the engagement?
I figured I’d weigh in on the Mario Williams lawsuit alleging that his ex-fiancee refuses to return the 10 carat engagement ring valued at $785,000.
So can this lovely woman really keep the engagement ring even though the couple did not jump the broom? Isn’t possession nine-tenths of the law? The ring is a gift, right? What about all of the gifts that Williams bought her and the AmEx charges she incurred?
Well, to address all of the questions that may be circulating in your head regarding whether a woman has a legal right to keep an engagement ring if the couple does not wed, the short answer is possibly not. Of course, each jurisdiction has its own laws regarding conditional gifts like engagement rings. Here in Arizona, the law on conditional gifts are silent. Texas, however, views an engagement ring as an implied conditional gift. This means that in that state, Williams likely to get the ring back only if he did not break off the engagement. He alleges that his ex-fiancee did, so he may be able to recover the ring.
With that being said, the man likely cannot recover other gifts using the same legal theory. So in Texas, Williams would have to eat the cost of showering his ex with lavish gifts.
I wish these fine folks the best….
Young people need to consider estate planning, too: how failing to plan literally could mean planning to fail
I came across this interesting article this morning regarding young people and estate planning. It discusses a few points that I would like to highlight:
- Unless you have estate plans in place, your jurisdiction’s laws will dictate who receives your property when you die. In other words, your state’s laws are the default as far as how your estate will be disposed. A will changes the default laws. For you to better understand this, imagine that you die and leave behind an estranged sister and a cousin who is like a brother. Unless you draft a will leaving your estate to your cousin, your jurisdiction may award your estate to your sister, regardless of the lack of a relationship.
- Without incapacity planning, should you become unable to make decisions regarding your medical treatment and business affairs, your wishes will not be known or implemented. There are three legal devices in particular used in incapacity planning:
(a) Designation of a healthcare proxy — a healthcare proxy is an individual who will make medical decisions on your behalf should you lose the ability to do so for yourself. HIPAA prevents people like your mom, dad, boyfriend, or girlfriend, for example, from accessing your medical records unless you expressly nominate one of these parties as your healthcare proxy. So if you are a single twenty something, for example, who has graduated from college and working in his dream job after moving away from his hometown, should you fall ill, even if you would have wanted your dad to make your healthcare decisions in event of incapacitation, he will not be able to unless you expressly designate him as your healthcare proxy.
(b) Living will — a living will allows you to make your wishes be known in terms of life-saving medical treatments should you become incapacitated. For example, if you do not wish for physicians to place you on life support, you can say so in your living will.
(c) Power of attorney — a power of attorney is a person who you appoint to make financial decisions on your behalf, not exclusively in events of incapacitation.
Keep in mind that if you want or need to make changes to any of your estate plans, you may. Once you execute them, that does not mean that you cannot alter them. If you decide that you need to change your healthcare proxy or want to revoke your power of attorney, you may do that. You may also make changes to your will should you want to add, change, or remove beneficiaries. The moral of today’s story is that you’re never too young to think about estate planning!
Mom resurfaces 11 years after inexplicably abandoning her family — what are the legal consequences of her actions?
Happy Monday, everyone. Have you heard the story of the mother who had disappeared over a decade ago and resurfaced last week? She disappeared in February 2002 after dropping her kids off at school. Her husband subsequently was under a cloud of suspicion regarding her disappearance. He sought to have her declared legally deceased so that he could move on with his life and has since remarried. When the mother turned herself over to authorities in Florida, her now-adult daughter was, understandably, not exactly excited to learn that her mother had resurfaced.
In some circumstances, abandonment of children can give rise to involuntary termination of parental rights. A person seeking to terminate a parent’s rights would have the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the parent abandoned the child. Examples of evidence that can be used in this kind of scenario include failure to financially support a child and lack of communication with the child.
To answer the question posed in the title of this post, which is what are the legal consequences of a parent’s abandonment of her children, we must turn to each jurisdiction’s statutes. In Arizona’s family law statute, for example, once a parent-child relationship is terminated, each party no longer has “legal rights, duties [or] obligations” concerning one another except “the right of the child to inherit[ance] and support from the parent.” In other words, unless a final order of adoption terminates a biological child’s right to inheritance and support, the child still has the right to receive them. However, if a biological child predeceases the biological parent (in other words, dies before the parent), the Arizona statute does not grant the biological parent the right to inherit from her deceased child’s estate.
I hope to have some heart-warming family law stories in the near future.
TGIF, but the blogging must go on!
I have been trying to decide all week what to do with my Friday posts. I think I will use those days to get feedback from you, the readers. I am including a poll addressing what kind of blog posts you would like to see more of. Also, please feel free to leave suggestions and feedback in the “comments” section.
Have a great weekend, everyone!
Are Porsha and Kordell Stewart faking their divorce for TV? What are the legal implications?
If the rumors about Real Housewives of Atlanta star Porsha Stewart and former Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Kordell Stewart are true, family law probably cannot keep up fast enough with the drama of reality television (pun sort of intended).
Have you ever wondered what happens when a couple gets a sham divorce? If you have, then read on. If you haven’t, I’m still going to tell you. Apparently, even though Kordell Stewart filed for divorce, he and Porsha still reside together. Georgia law does not require couples to live apart in order to obtain a divorce, but they must be legally separated. Ways to demonstrate legal separation to the courts include refraining from sharing a bedroom and ceasing to engage in sexual relations. So the RHOA couple still could very well obtain a valid divorce if they can prove that they are legally separated. If they are just playing games for the sake of their reality television careers, though, that may not fly when trying to obtain a divorce.
Would you divorce your spouse but secretly stay together for fame and money?
Five-year-old brother fatally shoots two-year-old sister — where were their parents?
A five-year-old Kentucky boy accidentally and fatally shot his two-year-old sister while his mother was at home. He received the .22-caliber rifle that he shot his sister with as a present, and, according to the family, the adults were unaware that it was loaded. Since I grew up and spent a considerable amount of my life in the Northeast, I did not know that gun ownership by young children is not unheard of in the South.
No, this is not going to turn into a Second Amendment debate. That is a conversation for another blogger to facilitate. I want to address questions that some may have regarding these parents: Can they go to jail for this? Shouldn’t the authorities take the rest of their kids away? What kind of people give their five-year-old child a gun?
Even though this is not a criminal law blog, I will briefly touch upon the criminal implications since criminal law often intersects with family law. There could be child endangerment implications in this case. Kentucky Child Protective Services could also get involved. In order for these parents’ parental rights to be terminated, though, a high legal burden must be met. As far as “what kind of people” would give their small child a gun, well, that is outside of my scope of expertise, nor am I in a position to judge whether it was right or wrong.
All I can say is that my sympathy goes to the little girl who died, her brother who has to live with the memory of shooting her, and all affected in this tragic case. I hope people take away from this story the importance of gun safety if you choose to have firearms, especially in a house with children.
Amoo Law Firm 