February 8, 2015

Planning a Summer Vacation Under a Colorado Child Custody Order

sand-84589_640.jpgRepresenting clients during a divorce case is only part of our Denver family law practice. If a couple has children who are under the age of 18, our clients' responsibilities continue long after the judge grants the divorce, and we are there to help. (Please note that Colorado courts no longer use the word "custody," but since it remains a familiar term, we will use it here.) Vacations, especially during summer breaks from school, are an important part of childhood, but as great as summer vacations can be, they can also be a major source of conflict between parents who share custody. How does Colorado family law handle this sort of situation?

As a general rule, it is always a good idea to notify the other parent of a planned summer vacation. A parent may be legally obligated to get the other parent's permission for a trip, however, based on two factors: the timing of the trip and the destination.

Timing of a Summer Vacation

A parent can schedule a vacation during one of their designated periods of summer visitation without necessarily needing the other parent's permission. Most parenting plans allow alterations to the established schedule with both parents' agreement, such as if a planned vacation is only possible at a time not covered by the existing parenting plan. It should go without saying that it is absolutely critical to get any sort of agreement like this in writing.

Continue reading "Planning a Summer Vacation Under a Colorado Child Custody Order " »

February 1, 2015

GAPS IN COLORADO FAMILY LAW STATUTES (Part 2: Custody and Visitation)

man-on-a-bridge-4-1427250-m.jpg

Part 1 of this article focused on gaps in Colorado statute related to child support. Though the law is comprehensive, it's not perfect. Colorado family law and custody practitioners repeatedly experience situations in cases, whether divorce, custody, or otherwise, in which they say to themselves, "statute should clearly state....," or "this gray area would be easily resolved if the legislature had only gone one step further." I could sit in my office for hours finding various holes in our family law statutory sections, where just a little more clarity might take away some of the ambiguity that parties, lawyers, and judges face. The second part of this multi-part posting will focus on various gaps in custody and visitation laws and will also suggest potential, easy solutions to such.

1. A very common questions I'm asked is "at what age do my children get to choose who they live with or when they see the other parent?" The proper answer, under Colorado custody laws, is "there is no magical or statutory age at which kids get to decide as to custody or visitation." In practice, most courts will generally start to give kids more autonomy around age 14. By 16 or 17, most courts will give significant weight to the child's wishes. Regardless of age, families and children are bound by the ambiguity in Colorado law, which often leads to legal wrangling and court battles over what to do with teenagers. Pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-129, one must technically show either physical endangerment or significant emotional impairment to a child's development in order to change primary residential custody. What about situations in which that 16 year old come out and says, "I want to go live with mom?" Technically, if there is no physical or emotional danger at dad's home, the change in custody should not occur. It's time for Colorado statute to catch up to the laws of some other states. I represent clients in various states throughout the county. Many of them indicate, "well, if the child was in my state he would get to decide at age "X." Often times I hear 14. The youngest I commonly hear is age 12, in Florida. Though a 12 year old should not be vested with deciding where to live, or what parenting time to exercise, a bright line age set forth in Colorado statute, such as 15, could cut down on significant amounts of litigation related to older teenagers. Beyond legal battles over modifying residential custody, a concrete age would also assist in initial divorce case in which there is a teenager. It would also alleviate litigation under C.R.S. 14-10-129.5 related to enforcement of parenting time orders. I've seen too many cases over the years in which a teenager says he or she doesn't want to go to the other parent's home, contrary to the court orders. These situations, sad and difficult in the first place, are often mad worse when the other parent decides to bring first parent to court for violation of the orders. Though some judges and experts recognize that the first parent cannot physically pick up that 5 foot 10 inch child and throw him into the car, some judges do not. Courts can take violations of orders seriously and such can potentially even lead to jail time. Again, a bright line rule as to age would end these battles over enforcement of visitation orders, and lighten court dockets. As one wise family law judge puts it, "a teenager is like an 800 pound gorilla and you can't make that gorilla go where it doesn't want to. The teenage years are crazy enough. A little clarity in statute might help take out some of the drama for all. Of course, with underdeveloped brains and raging hormones, statute would need to have caveats to full autonomy, such as might relate to substance abuse, violence, lack of academic guidance or significant mental illness in one party's home. Absent those things, and with two good parents, a 15 year old should have a choice and parents should have clear guidance as to the law.

Continue reading "GAPS IN COLORADO FAMILY LAW STATUTES (Part 2: Custody and Visitation) " »

January 25, 2015

GAPS IN COLORADO FAMILY LAW STATUTES (Part 1: Child Support)

As experienced family law attorneys in the Denver area, we have seen a multitude of situations over the years in divorce, custody and child support cases. Having represented more clients than easily countable, we have observed certain scenarios arise, now and then, for which there is no specific statutory remedy or answer. In other words, we sometimes find ourselves pondering or debating why the Colorado Legislature, with multiple members and input from the domestic relations bar, could leave certain aspects of statute vague or with no specific rule? As we see these types of issue arise over and over, so should other attorneys. Regardless, the gaps go unchanged. Below are some of those gaps in statute, related to child support, which are in need of bridging through additional language.

1. C.R.S. 14-10-122 is the statutory section dealing with modification of child support. C.R.S. 14-10-122 indicates that a modification of child support can be applied retroactively to either the date a motion is filed, or when an agreed upon change in custody of a child occurs. The second scenario will still ultimately require a motion. The rationale in this retroactivity is that it can take some time for parties to actually obtain a court hearing and get a change to child support change formally effectuated or ruled upon. Despite these protections afforded to the parties, there are still instances in which statute could provide more guidance. One relates to stopping child support upon that change in custody, whether agreed upon or not. We have seen cases in which the child goes from mom to dad, or vice versa, and contrary to the terms of the current custody orders . In some cases, one party may take on the custodial obligations for the child, but continues to be saddled with paying the child support obligation until such time as the matter goes to court, if at all. Realistically, as simple rule indicating that when custody changes, regardless of agreed upon or not, the duty to pay child support automatically abates until such time as a hearing occurs. With this type of a black and white rule, the party taking custody of the child is not burdened with technically having to pay the other party until such time as a court hearing, which can take months. As a matter of fairness and financial practicality, the party obtaining custody shouldn't have to go to court for other proceedings to get his or her Colorado child support stopped. Of course this is a separate issue from whether he or she wants to receive child support. Simple language, such as "when a change in primary residential care occurs, regardless of the reason, and regardless of whether the new custodial parent seeks a modification, the obligation to pay child support shall automatically be abated until such time as a hearing is held." This language would not eliminate the potential for factual he-said/she-said arguments. It would, however, provide immediate relief.

Continue reading "GAPS IN COLORADO FAMILY LAW STATUTES (Part 1: Child Support) " »

January 12, 2015

Pledging Separate Property as Collateral for Marital Property Loan in Colorado

yellow-aspen-trees-9-1100273-m.jpgIn a Colorado divorce, when the court divides property, it must determine whether an asset is marital (subject to division) or separate (not subject to division). Generally, marital property doesn't include property that spouses obtained before marrying or that they have agreed will remain separate. If a spouse places separate property into joint ownership with the other spouse, however, the court presumes he or she intended it to be marital property. This presumption can be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence. However, if separate property is commingled with marital property such that it can't be traced back to separate property, it is transmuted into part of the marital estate.

In re the Marriage of Amy Corak and Nevan Corak considered a husband's appeal of a Colorado trial court's allocation of marital property. The case arose in 2010 when a couple entered into a prenuptial agreement. The agreement identified assets that would be separate property, which included a parcel of the husband's property ("Shoshone"). All separate property was supposed to remain separate property if the marriage ended.

A month after the couple married, they purchased the Pinyon property. The husband pledged Shoshone as collateral for a home equity line of credit. This was to be used as a down payment for the new marital property. The couple decided they would use $16,000, drawn from the line of credit, to pay off the wife's credit card debt from before the marriage.

Continue reading "Pledging Separate Property as Collateral for Marital Property Loan in Colorado " »

January 3, 2015

Do I Get To Pick The Judge In My Denver Divorce Or Custody Case?


An experienced Denver family law attorney knows that a critical factor in how a case could be decided, should it go to full blown litigation, or a trial, is which judge the case will be in front of. In the body of law that encompasses divorce, child support, and custody, there are certain facts that leave little room for discretion in terms of how a court might rule. This could be a situation in which all monetary figures are known in a child support calculation and the only thing to be done is to apply the statutory formula. However, there are many other areas, such as determining visitation (parenting time) or equitable division of marital property in which a judge is given a wide range of latitude to render decisions she or he feels is in the child's best interest or is "equitable." With the presumption that all area judges render decisions in an ethically "fair" or appropriate manner, the reality is that subjectivity in terms of how a judge views a specific issue can come into play. It's just human nature.

With years of experience, our attorneys strive to learn about each judge and to ascertain his or her leanings on the various family law topic which might arise in a case. As such, one of the first questions I will ask a client who comes to us with a case already under way is "which courtroom is your case in?" or "what judge or magistrate do you have?" Of course, I will then let the client know my opinion on how I think a particular issue will be dealt with. Sometimes, we may get case in which we know our client will have a tougher time meeting his or her objectives due to the courtroom he or she is in, or that the case might go a completely different way if heard somewhere else. At those instances, it is not uncommon for the client to ask "can we request a new judge?" In those instances, our response will almost always be, "no."

Continue reading "Do I Get To Pick The Judge In My Denver Divorce Or Custody Case? " »

December 8, 2014

Denver Divorce and Hidden Assets

stock-photo-27500969-close-up-of-couple-doing-finances-at-home.jpg

Whether a Douglas County divorce attorney, or one practicing just below the slopes of the Aspen ski hills, we all know the importance of financial disclosures in any divorce case. Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure rule 16.2 sets forth the procedural aspects, or rules, a court expects parties, with or without attorneys, to follow related to case management. This includes rules regarding disclosure of documents and information related to the financial issues of a divorce case, which can include property division, debt division, maintenance (alimony), and child support.

Sadly, from time to time, we see cases in which one party will attempt to hide assets from the other party. In most cases people are forthcoming, understanding that they are indicating to the divorce court, under penalty of perjury, that they have provided a complete listing of their assets and debts. However, every once in a while, you will get that one person who feels they might get away with not disclosing a bank account, stock account, or perhaps that tangible piece of property, such as artwork or a piece of expensive jewelry. Of course, there are limitations to what an attorney, or even a private investigator, might be able to find. In employing the tricks-of-the-trade, family law attorneys know how to go through the various financial disclosures to assess whether there are other items being concealed. Of course, this is not full proof. Likewise, people may come to an attorney after their divorce is done, indicating they believe the other side hid something from them. Fortunately, whatever the situation, statute affords parties to a Colorado divorce case a remedy, via a 5 year window, in which to seek relief should hidden or undisclosed assets become known.

Initially, C.R.C.P. Rule 16.2(e)(2) requires the parties to a divorce case to voluntarily disclose the following as can relate to assets:

A "Sworn Financial Statement"
The last three years of personal (and business if applicable)
Personal financial statements
Business financial statements
Real estate documentation
Investment account statements
Retirement account statements
Employment benefit statements
Bank statements
Income documentation
Insurance documentation

Continue reading "Denver Divorce and Hidden Assets " »

December 1, 2014

Child Support Arrearages in Colorado

hands-1402625-m.jpgChild support in Colorado is calculated according to the Colorado Child Support Guideline found at C.R.S. 14-10-115, revised in January 2014. In Denver and the surrounding areas, divorced parents must meet their child support obligations until the child is emancipated. This happens when the child graduates from high school, turns 19, joins the military, marries, becomes self-sufficient, or dies, whichever is earliest. Child support orders entered after July 1, 1997 terminate automatically when the youngest child reaches 19, unless the court has ordered otherwise. Sometimes the court orders child support to extend after this point, such as when a child is physically or mentally disabled and incapable of supporting himself or herself.

What happens if a parent fails to pay child support and the children are out of the home? Child support arrearages--child support that is still owed--must be paid even after the kids move out. The court must modify a child support order if the support is to be reduced for any reason. This means, for example, that if you owe child support for two children, and one child is emancipated while the other is not, you must still pay the total amount of child support until you obtain a modification from the court.

Generally, if you think there has been a substantial change in circumstances that warrants a change in child support, you should consult an Arapahoe County family law attorney to help you request a modification, rather than simply allowing arrearages to accumulate. A parent who is not paid child support for many years doesn't waive the right to bring a claim for arrearages by delaying in seeking it.

Continue reading "Child Support Arrearages in Colorado " »

November 28, 2014

Same Sex Divorce and Child Custody Issues in Colorado

baby-hands-1391967-m.jpgAs we have earlier covered on this blog, same-sex marriages are now legal in Colorado because the United States Supreme Court decided not to hear any appeals regarding the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans from the 10th Circuit. Now that same-sex civil marriages are recognized in Colorado, divorces are also possible, and with divorce will come child custody and visitation issues.

Assuming both partners are legal parents of the child, the same standards will be used for child custody issues as are used when heterosexual couples divorce. The parents may both be legal parents of the child when the child is born into a same-sex marriage or when a non-biological or non-adoptive parent adopts his or her partner's biological child through a second parent or stepparent adoption. The standard for child custody and visitation in that case will be the best interests of the child under C.R.S. 14-10-123.4.

However, if only you or only your same-sex spouse is your child's legal parent, you may need to bring a paternity or maternity petition in order to obtain custody and visitation when you and your spouse separate. Based on prior case law, it does not appear that Colorado child custody and visitation proceedings will be handled any differently because of the legalization of same-sex marriage. In general, it is to be expected that the Colorado courts will place the child's best interests first and award parenting time to the parent who is not a legal parent when that parent has acted as a parent throughout the child's life, and when there is no other biological parent whose rights would be affected.

Continue reading "Same Sex Divorce and Child Custody Issues in Colorado " »

November 24, 2014

Impact of Domestic Violence on Child Custody in Colorado

anxious-1-867286-m.jpgRecently, there has been significant public attention to issues of domestic violence around the nation. Domestic violence is a pattern of abusive behavior within a family or other intimate relationship. It can include spousal abuse or child abuse, and it can go beyond physical violence, including verbal abuse, emotional abuse, economic abuse, and psychological abuse. Last year, more than 10,000 domestic violence misdemeanor cases were filed, and this drop of 13% is considered an improvement. It is not uncommon for an abusive spouse to claim that he or she will take the kids, or take away support or insurance so that the kids don't have money. Under the Colorado Victims Rights Act, a perpetrator cannot take away kids or housing.

Under ยง 14-10-124(1.5)(a)(IX) and (X), C.R.S.2005, a Colorado court is supposed to consider whether one of the spouses has perpetrated child or spousal abuse when making an allocation of parenting time. However, a finding of child abuse or spousal abuse doesn't automatically result in the court denying parenting time to the parent who perpetrated the abuse, even though it is a relevant factor to determining the child's best interests. In many cases, the parent who has been charged with child abuse, for example, has worked on issues with a therapist and ultimately the parenting coordinator, and others agree that he or she can have parenting time or even be the primary residential parent.

How do the courts decide these difficult cases? In general, the courts will look at whether the perpetrator received therapy or counseling, how far in the past the incident was, the healthiness of the attachment between the perpetrator and the child, the impact of the abuse on the child, and the perpetrator's ability to put the child's needs first.

Continue reading "Impact of Domestic Violence on Child Custody in Colorado " »

November 5, 2014

Motion to Modify Child Support Asks for a Reduction in the Support Obligation, but Results in an Increase

Denver_skyline.jpgA motion to modify child support did not go the way a father and ex-husband probably hoped. The father sought to reduce his monthly child support obligation, but the trial court raised it instead. The Colorado Court of Appeals denied the father's appeal, holding in part that alleged misconduct by the wife did not entitle the father to modification of the child support amount. In re the Marriage of Roddy and Morelli, No. 13CA0632, slip op. (Col. App., Jul. 31, 2014).

The parties were divorced in 2003. The decree of dissolution stated that their minor child would reside primarily with the wife, and that the father would pay $3,000 per month in child support. He filed a motion to modify child support about eight years later, seeking a reduction in the monthly amount based on an increase in parenting time and a decrease in income. Colorado law generally allows modifications to child support if a movant can show "changed circumstances that are substantial and continuing." C.R.S. 14-10-122(1)(a). After a three-day hearing, however, the court increased the father's monthly child support obligation to $4,604.

The father filed a motion for post-trial relief, alleging that the wife withheld financial records, and that this entitled him to relief under the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure's disclosure requirements. C.R.C.P. 16.2(e)(10). During the modification hearing, the trial court had found the wife's 2011 tax return to be "the only remotely credible source of information" about her income. Roddy at 1-2. The trial court denied the post-trial motion, though, holding that the wife's income was not relevant to the issue of modification regardless of any alleged misconduct. The father appealed both the child support order and the post-trial order.

Continue reading "Motion to Modify Child Support Asks for a Reduction in the Support Obligation, but Results in an Increase " »

October 22, 2014

What Time Period Should a Colorado Court Consider When Determining "Current Financial Resources" in a Divorce?

Samuel_D._Ehrhart,_An_international_high_noon_divorce,_1906.jpgColorado law allows a trial court to order one party to a divorce to pay for the other party's attorney's fees. C.R.S. 14-10-119. The court must take both parties' financial resources into account, including both the amount available to one party and the amount needed by the other, in determining the amount of the order. The statute is silent, however, on the time period, or point in time, that the court should consider in determining an amount. The Colorado Court of Appeals recently considered this issue in a case where the trial court held separate hearings on permanent orders and attorney's fees about six months apart. In re the Marriage of de Koning, No. 12CA2334, slip op. (Col. App., Jan. 2, 2014). The parties disagreed on which hearing date the court should use in considering the amount of financial resources.

The wife incurred about $90,000 in attorney's fees during the divorce proceedings. The husband paid about $20,000 of that amount before the entry of permanent orders, and the wife requested that the court order him to pay the remaining amount at the permanent orders hearing. The court entered a decree dissolving the marriage, as well as permanent orders regarding the division of the marital estate, maintenance, and parental responsibilities and child support. It deferred a ruling on attorney's fees, however, and set a hearing for six months later.

The wife served the husband with discovery requests seeking information about his personal and business financial accounts. He obtained a protective order for this information from the court, which agreed with his claim that any eventual attorney's fee award would be based on his financial resources on the date of the permanent orders. At the fee hearing, he claimed that he should not be ordered to pay the remainder of the wife's attorney's fees because they each had the same amount of assets "on paper." De Koning at 3.

Continue reading "What Time Period Should a Colorado Court Consider When Determining "Current Financial Resources" in a Divorce? " »

October 17, 2014

Colorado Child Support and Self-Employed Individuals

Pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-115, the statutory section regarding establishment of Colorado child support, the primary financial factor leading to a calculation of support is a litigant's incomes. As discussed in prior postings, there are basic figures, such as income, number of children, and number of overnight visits per year the payor has with the children, that go into generation of a monthly child support amount. Child support is generally easily calculated when there are two people to the equation, both of whom have traditional jobs with readily discernable income. However, when one person is a business owner, or self employed, the analysis of what income figure should be used for that person becomes more complex. Likewise, challenges can arise related to collection of child support from that self employed person. This posting will address both issues as may arise in the legal arena.

As Denver area child support attorneys, we have seen almost any scenario imaginable related to child support. The one scenario requiring perhaps the most scrutiny relates to ascertaining income for a self employed person. This task can arise not only related to the other party's income, but also our own clients. As a starting point, C.R.S. 14-10-115(a)(1) sets forth definitions of what is or is not income for child support purposes. Subsection (D) states, "Payments received as an independent contractor for labor or services, which payments must be considered income from self-employment." Subsection (O) states, "Any money drawn by a self-employed individual for personal use that are deducted as a business expense, which money must be considered income from self employment." Subsection (W) states, "Income from general partnerships, limited partnerships, closely held corporations, or limited liability companies...." In essence, the funds one takes for personal use under any of these scenarios is considered income for child support calculation purposes.

Continue reading "Colorado Child Support and Self-Employed Individuals " »

October 8, 2014

COLORADO DIVORCE AND SAME SEX MARRIAGE


On October 6, 2014, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear cases coming from various US Circuit Courts of Appeal regarding the issue of same sex marriage and rulings finding the bans of various states on same sex marriages to be unconstitutional. One (or more) of those cases came from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, located in the heart of our booming metropolis, that being Denver.

From a legal analysis standpoint, by declining to hear or weigh in on those case, the US Supreme Court effectively let stand the decisions that the various state laws at issue in the Courts of Appeals cases were null and void. Colorado, including, of course Denver, is part of the 10th Circuit, which also includes Kansas, Wyoming, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Utah. The specific rulings which strike down the laws prohibiting or curtailing same sex marriages are applicable throughout the circuit.

The intent of this post is not to weigh in on the hot button topic of same sex marriage. We are lawyers, not politicians or political pundits. Any opinion will offend one side or other of the debate. We don't want to offend anyone. Whether same sex marriage if viewed by some as "right" and some as "wrong," the legal fact is that the greenlight has been given for counties throughout the state to start authorizing same sex marriage, or rather not blocking such.

As same sex marriages evolve in Colorado, so shall same sex divorces. With the 2013 passing of the Civil Union bill in Colorado, Denver area family law attorneys have already seen changes to the domestic relations law legal landscape. Contrary to what some might have anticipated, those changes have not had a significant impact on the courts or us, as attorneys. In the few months since the Bill became law, we have talked to clients, or potential clients, regarding dissolution of civil unions, and have litigated civil union dissolutions. Realistically, the process for dissolving a civil union is almost identical to dissolving a marriage. There is no reason to believe that dissolution of a same sex marriage will be any different.

Continue reading "COLORADO DIVORCE AND SAME SEX MARRIAGE " »

September 15, 2014

Colorado Custody and Relocation With Children (Part 2)

Part 1 of this posting, from June 2014, focused on the basics of relocation with children in a Colorado custody case, including analysis(es) related to situations which might arise either prior to a case being filed, or while a case is pending, as well as pre-final orders requests to move from Colorado with children, covered under a court case called Spahmer. Though various portions of statute and case law deal with the pre-final orders aspects of custody and relocation, there is a completely different legal standard for seeking permission to leave Colorado with the children after final orders have entered in a divorce or custody case.

Once final, or "permanent" orders have entered, there are two scenarios in which relocation with children could become an issue. Prior to getting into an analysis of the law related to properly requesting a change in location, I will briefly address a situation we, as Denver custody attorneys, see from time to time. Though not common, there are instances in which one party to a custody case decides to leave Colorado, or the Denver metropolitan area, with the children and without seeking permission of the court or the other party. If there are parenting time orders in place, the expectation of any court is that they will be followed. If one party decides to just leave Denver, and abscond with the children without permission, the law affords various remedies to the other party. Of course any family law attorney should advise his or her clients that just leaving with the children can have tragic legal consequences.

When on party leave Colorado with the children such that he denies the other party his or her visitation, he or she becomes subject to relief under C.R.S. 14-10-129.5, which relates to enforcement of parenting time orders. Most certainly, he or she will ultimately lose actual physical custody of the children for leaving the state without permission. He or she will likely also be subject to contempt of court proceedings, which can include jail. C.R.S. 14-10-129.5 also contains contempt like provisions. Beyond these avenues for relief, the person wrongly leaving, when caught, can expect to have is or her visitation taken away and will likely have to endure supervised visitation for quite some time until he or she proves they are no longer a flight risk. The arm of the law within the United States is long. Should one elect to flee to another state, once found, it is likely the other side with take steps under the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act to get the children returned to Colorado. Finally, violating Colorado custody orders and fleeing the state, or area, with the children is technically a felony and can lead to serious criminal consequences, including potentially prison. Colorado family law courts do not like to see their orders regarding visitation violated and the penalties can be harsh. Of course, the "relocation", per se, discussed in this paragraph is the exception and the wrong way to go about things.

When a party determines that he or she wishes to move from Colorado, with the children, the proper route to go is to seek relief from the court pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-129, the parenting time modification statute. C.R.S. 14-10-129(2)(c) specifically addresses the issues centered around a parent's desire to relocate with the children, including procedures, legal standards in terms of what the court is looking for in terms of information to make a determination, etc. Relocation cases are generally also viewed under a case called Ciesluk, 113 P.3d 135 (Colo. 2005), in which the court determined that a court should look at the best interest factors set forth in C.R.S. 14-10-124, as well as those enumerated in (2)(c). Unlike a Spahmer analysis, the reason for the move under Ciesluk matters more significantly.

Continue reading "Colorado Custody and Relocation With Children (Part 2) " »

August 25, 2014

Recent Colorado Appellate Case Discusses Arbitration in the Divorce Context

Arbitration has become more and more popular in the last few years, as litigants opt to resolve their issues outside of the formal courtroom and in the more informal setting of arbitration. Although not as formal as a courtroom, the arbitrator's decision on the legal issues in front of him or her is generally legally binding. In fact, in some cases the reviewability of an arbitrator's decision is extremely limited.

broken-heart-1321733-m.jpgAlso, there are a few important limitations on an arbitrator's authority to decide legal issues. The Colorado Court of Appeals recently decided a case that required the Court explain how arbitration fits into the family law context, specifically divorce.

The Facts

The facts of the case are quite simple, actually. Husband and Wife got divorced and, as a part of the divorce, Husband was to pay Wife $4 million over the course of several years. The payments were structured so that Husband would pay Wife a monthly amount for several years and then, after all marital property had been liquidated, Husband would pay Wife the remaining amount in a lump sum. The final part of the deal was that Husband was entitled to some credits, according to expenses he incurred while selling the property.

Continue reading "Recent Colorado Appellate Case Discusses Arbitration in the Divorce Context " »