December 5, 2013

COLORADO CHILD SUPPORT: 2014 CHANGES

stock-photo-14020997-flying-dollars.jpg

As 2013 draws to a close, Denver area divorce and custody attorneys know that various changes are coming to Colorado statute in 2014, that relate to many aspects of family law, including statute related to child support. The general child support statute is set forth in Colorado Revised Statutes section 14-10-115. C.R.S. 14-10-115 covers the majority of topics related to the calculation of child support, specific dollar amounts owed, definitions of income, and other specifics on the subject. Commencing January 1, 2014, certain changes, some significant, will come into play which will likely affect parties with child support cases moving forward. Perhaps the most significant change relates to the restructuring in the acutal guidelines set forth in the statute in terms of what should be paid based on income levels.

Colorado child support is calculated based on a formula. The primary factors for establishing child support are the incomes of the parties, the number of children, the amount of overnight parenting time spent with the children, each year, by the non-custodial parent, day care costs, if any, and health insurance costs, if any. The numbers leading to a child support calculation are plugged into software, which then generates a monthly child support amount, based on a statutory formula. C.R.S. 14-10-115 contains a basic table setting forth the amount the legislature has deemed needed to support a child, or children, depending upon the parties' combined monthly gross incomes. This figure is titled the "basic support obligation" and is not the actual monthly child support amount owed. Without any adjustments, which will not be discussed in this posting, the software would, in essence, divide the monthly support obligation between the parties proportionate to their incomes, with the presumption that the payor is paying his or her proportionate share to the custodial parent.

Current support obligation figures were established commencing 2008. On the low end of the table or chart, parties with a combined monthly gross income of $850 would have a combined support obligation of $184 for one child. On the high end of the current table, the maximum combined monthly income set forth is $20,000 per month and the combined support obligation for one child would be $1858. The 2014 changes not only increase or decrease the combined support obligation, depending on the combined income and number of children, but also raises the upper most limit of the guideline combined income amount to $30,000 per month between the parties. This is significant in that some courts in the Denver metropolitan area have taken a position that they are not generally willing to exceed the $20,000 maximum guideline income amount for calculating child support. Thus, despite case law on the subject, there has been a gray area as relates to calculating child support for families making over $240,000 per year. That figure will now change to $360,000 per year. As such, persons with significant income over $240,000 will now lose any gray area as to what child support should be, up to the new $360,000 threshold. This change makes sense in that some sort of standard should be in place which limits potential litigation over what child support amount is fair for higher earning families. Perhaps such a change was long overdue.

Continue reading "COLORADO CHILD SUPPORT: 2014 CHANGES " »

November 19, 2013

Gifts and Property Division During a Colorado Divorce

white-house-1426634-m.jpgFrom the wedding and throughout the course of a marriage, a Colorado couple may receive many gifts, including gifts of real estate or significant amounts of money. If the couple gets divorced, one of the major controversies of the divorce may be who gets the property that was gifted. Is it separate property belonging to the partner who is friends or family with the gift giver? Or is it property to which both partners have a right? How does property division work in the case of gifts? Disposition of property in Colorado is covered by Colorado Revised Statute 14-10-113 and case law.

In a recent case, a husband appealed as to the property distribution ordered in connection with his divorce, among other things. One major piece of property that caused contention was the marital home. The couple had purchased the martial home together as joint property while they were married. Years later, the wife's mother had paid off the mortgage by making a direct transfer to the lender. The couple was still married at the time. Soon after she paid the mortgage, the mother signed a trust instrument that described all her gifts to the wife as advances on her inheritance.

The mother's trust instrument did not mention the husband. At trial, the wife testified the mother did not intend the mortgage payments as a gift to the marriage, but just to her. The husband testified both the wife and mother had told him it was a gift for them both. The trial court classified the home as the wife's separate property because her mother had contributed to the mortgage. It found that the funds used to pay the mortgage were treated as part of the wife's inheritance, which would be separate property.

Continue reading "Gifts and Property Division During a Colorado Divorce " »

October 30, 2013

Colorado Custody: Pregnancy, Birth, and the U.C.C.J.E.A.

stock-photo-1532654-love-care.jpg

Colorado custody is represented in an extensive body of law stemming from both statute and case law. The primary statutory section related to the establishment of custody and visitation is Colorado Revised Statutes section 14-10-124. Though this is the general section courts and lawyers look to, experienced Denver area family law attorneys know that there are additional statutory sections and intricacies that come to play. Though most custody cases in Colorado involve two parties who live in Colorado and intend on staying in Colorado, there are instances in which interstate issues arise. Without getting into an extensive analysis of interstate custody, this posting will focus on the issue of pregnancy, where a child is born, and how the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act governs custody matters in such instances.

Occasionally, though not often, our Colorado custody lawyers will get a call from an expectant mother wanting to retain legal services prior to the birth of her child. With similar frequency, we will also get calls from a potential father indicating that his former girlfriend, or sometimes wife, is pregnant, and wanting to know his rights and options as relate to custody. In either instance, the first question our attorneys will ask relates to where the child will be born and/or if the expectant mother is planning on remaining in Colorado to give birth. This question is extremely pivotal as relates to whether Colorado will even have jurisdiction to exercise jurisdiction over the child.

Pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, the UCCJEA, C.R.S. 14-13-102, a Colorado court can exercise custody, properly termed "parental responsibilities, jurisdiction over a child if Colorado is the child's "home state." The home state is generally the state in which a child has resided for the preceding 6 months prior to commencement of a case. For children under 6 months of age, the home state will be that state in which the child has lived since birth.

When an expectant father calls, his first question is often whether he can file a custody case prior to the birth of the child. The answer under Title 14 is "no." However, under C.R.S. Title 19, Article 4, the "paternity" statutory section, one can file a paternity case regarding an unborn child. In these instances, our attorneys are very cautious to assess what the father's wishes are. Additionally, we always ask whether he believes the expectant mother is intending to stay in Colorado during her pregnancy or if she is planning on going out of state to have the child. If the mother is planning on having the child out of state, and is not likely to return, there is really no reason for the father to file a custody case prior to the birth of the child. If the child is born elsewhere, regardless of where conceived, Colorado will not have jurisdiction over the child. Expectant fathers will often respond in disbelief when presented with the notion that they really have no say in whether the mother goes elsewhere to have the child or decides to live prior to birth of the child. Though a court, at least in a Title 19 situation, can exercise jurisdiction in this instance over the potential mother as will relate to financial issues, such as child support, the reality is that jurisdiction as to custody flows with the child, not the parents.

Continue reading "Colorado Custody: Pregnancy, Birth, and the U.C.C.J.E.A. " »

September 29, 2013

When May Non-parents Petition for Parental Responsibility in Colorado?

big-sister-first-day-of-school-1115880-m.jpgIn Colorado and other states within the United States, parents are deemed to have fundamental rights related to their child's care, guaranteed by the Constitution. However, parental rights may be trumped by a child's best interest. For example, there are circumstances in which a child's best interest may be better met by a nonparent than parent. A non-parent may petition the court for an allocation of parental responsibility only if certain conditions are met.

In a 2012 case, the Colorado Supreme Court considered the question of a minor whose parents divorced five months before she was born and who had a half-sister on her father's side. The minor lived outside Colorado with her mother until she was 3 years old when the father asked that she live with him and the half-sister.

The minor lived with the father and half-sister in Colorado for six years until the father died in 2008. At that point, she continued to live with her half-sister. For the first two years of living with her father, her mother visited regularly. But for the last several years before the father died, the mother had no physical contact, only telephone conversations and correspondence.

Continue reading "When May Non-parents Petition for Parental Responsibility in Colorado? " »

September 14, 2013

Avoiding Problems in Colorado Restraining Order Cases (Part 2)

stock-photo-2953612-stop-sign.jpg

Our last blog posting dealt with issues related to Colorado restraining orders. The posting was prompted by a rash of restraing order cases this summer, with numbers higher than any given year that I can remember in at least the last decade. In that article, I discusssed some of the pitfalls the person served with a restraining order might face, including pitfalls which could have lasting consequences, including criminal. This second posting on the topic will cover the opposite side of the coin in terms of behaviors the person seeking the protection order should avoid as relates to conduct, or contact with the restrained person.

When seeking a Colorado restraing order, the person in need of protection will first go to the court and fill out various forms, setting forth, on paper, the allegations or incidents which give rise to the need for protection. Generally, these allegations will relate to domestic violence, threats of domestic violence, or stalking type behaviors. Part of the paperwork will entail stating that he or she is in fear for his or her safety, or that of the children, if the other party is not restrained. In essence, the standard is that the person seeking protection is in fear of imminent harm if he or she is not protected.

Once the paperwork is turned in, the protected person will go before a judge or magistrate, testify as to his or her concerns and allegations, and most likely be issued a temporary protection order. An evidentiary hearing will also be set, at which it will be determined whether the protection order will be made permanent. As there are things a restrained person can do to damage his or her case, there are also things we, as Colorado family law attorneys, see over and over again, that the protected person can also do to damage the outcome of the case. Set forth below are a couple of simple rules to follow to help in making your protection order stick, or become permanent.

Continue reading "Avoiding Problems in Colorado Restraining Order Cases (Part 2) " »

September 1, 2013

Avoiding Problems in Colorado Restraining Order Cases (Part 1)

Judging by the number of restraining order cases, properly termed "protection orders," the experienced Denver area family law attorneys at Plog & Stein, P.C. have seen in the last few months, our assessment is that summer 2013 has been problematic from the standpoint of people behaving in inappropriate and unsafe behaviors. In other words, we have seen an extraordinarily large number of protection order cases this summer.

After successfully wrapping up another protection order case a couple of weeks ago, it dawned on me that there are certain pitfalls which either side of a restraining order case can face. Those pitfalls can have not only lasting effects as relates to that protection order, but also potential lasting effects in a custody case, or divorce case with children. Realistically, many restraining order cases will ultimately tie into a divorce or custody case. Some temporary restraining orders are even issued at the outset of such cases.

For now, I will focus solely on the protection order aspect of things. The general process for a protection order is that, first, the complaining party, or victim, will go to the court, without the other side, and state his or her case to the judge or magistrate, setting forth the allegations of violence, threats of violence, stalking, or whatever the case may be. One aspect of this initial hearing is the person essentially having to indicate that he or she is concerned for his or her safety in an immediate sense, if the other party is not restrained. He or she will actually check a box on the standard state form indicating such. Presuming the court believes, based on the testimony of the complaining party, that grounds exist, a temporary restraining order will be issued. The complaining party will then have the other party served with the complaint, as well as the temporary restraining order. On that order will be a set date for the parties to return for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the restraining order will be dismissed or made permanent.

With service of the Colorado restraining order, the defendant will also be served with specific notice indicating that violation of a protection order is a crime, punishable by time in jail, as well as potentially a fine. Violation of a protection order can also lead to the court potentially making the order permanent, or further contempt of court proceedings. If one is served with a temporary protection order, he or she must be certain to take seriously the warnings set forth in the paperwork.

Continue reading "Avoiding Problems in Colorado Restraining Order Cases (Part 1) " »

August 15, 2013

What Does The New Colorado Maintenance Law Say?

photo_1069_20060213.jpg The rumors circulating in the Denver Colorado family law community regarding alimony/maintenance, mentioned by us in early 2013 blog postings, have now become reality. Starting January 1, 2014, Colorado will be following new "maintenance" guidelines as set forth in Colorado's House Bill 13-1058, which was signed into law this past May. "Maintenance" has also been called alimony in the past and in other jurisdictions. It is money one spouse pays to a former spouse every month for a period after a divorce or formal separation.

In the recent past, in Colorado, courts have tended to disfavor maintenance except where circumstances are especially compelling. This included scenarios such as when a lower-earning spouse needs to attend school or training to be able to support themselves or where a former spouse has a physical condition that impairs his or her ability to work or where one party has to take care of an infant or toddler.

Those who may have been concerned about this new law can rest assured that most of the law is not truly "new." Rather, many of the factors outlined in the new law were previously left up to an individual judge's discretion and this sometimes led to inconsistent results in factually similar scenarios. What is new is that the Spousal Maintenance Act offers a concrete formula to calculate maintenance and detailed guidelines for the court to implement in determining the amount of maintenance and the term.

Continue reading "What Does The New Colorado Maintenance Law Say? " »

July 29, 2013

Division of Property During Divorce in Colorado

photo_6288_20080611.jpgIf you file for divorce in Colorado, within 40 days of serving your husband or wife you must also file a sworn financial statement with the court and make various mandatory disclosures to your spouse. Unlike some other states, Colorado is not a community property state; not all of your property is considered equally the property of your spouse. Therefore, the judicial system requires that spouses make each other aware of their financial information while coming to an agreement on marital property, debts, and maintenance.

When the parties are unable to come to an agreement, the court divides the marital property by weighing several factors. Among these factors are: each party's contribution to acquiring the property, including the contribution of a homemaking spouse, the value of each party's contribution, economic circumstances of both partners when they divorce, which partner is going to have custody of the children, and any changes in property values where only one party owns the property. Some items often considered "marital property" by the court are pensions, life insurance policies, tools, businesses, houses, vehicles and furniture.

Continue reading "Division of Property During Divorce in Colorado " »

June 26, 2013

When is Child Support Terminated or Modified in Colorado?

1391967_baby_hands-1.jpgChild support is considered a child's right in Colorado. In every divorce or custody case involving children in Colorado, the court will determine whether one parents owes the other child support. Usually child support does not continue indefinitely, of course; it terminates upon a child's emancipation.

"Emancipation" in Colorado occurs when a child turns 19, marries, joins the military, graduates from high school and/or becomes self-sufficient, or death--whichever comes first. These are considered the moments when a child becomes an adult.

Until child support is terminated, a mathematical formula in Colorado's child support guidelines are used to calculate the appropriate amounts. While it is possible to calculate the amount yourself using worksheets, an attorney can help you figure out whether you can ask the court for a deviation from the formula or not. For example, an attorney can argue to the court on your behalf if you need to ask for more child support because of large medical expenses or private school tuition. Support is calculated using both parents' incomes and taking into account how much time each parent spends with the kids. The guidelines do not apply, however, in the case of very low or very high-income parents.

Continue reading "When is Child Support Terminated or Modified in Colorado? " »

June 12, 2013

DENVER DIVORCE AND YOUR BUSINESS

stock-photo-17342896-hispanic-woman-in-boutique-with-a-open-sign.jpg


As divorce attorneys in Denver, we deal with various issues in any case. This can include issues related to children, property, financial support, and more. Not all cases are the same. One of the significant issues that can arise in a divorce is the division of property. In most cases, the property to be divided consists of a home, retirement and bank accounts, vehicles, investment accounts, or the furniture and pots and pans. However, there are families or parties to a divorce case who own businesses or business interests. As part of our divorce practice, experienced family law attorneys at Plog & Stein assist with the valuation and division of business assets as well.

Colorado business interests come in all shapes and sizes. A person may own a large business, such as a chain of restaurants or a car dealership. A person may own a small business, such as a one person accounting firm or a mom-and-pop laundry mat. A person might also own a fraction or portion of a business, without owning the whole entity outright. In a Colorado divorce setting, a business, or interest in a business, is generally considered property. As property, the same principles for dividing other assets apply. Property acquired during the marriage, absent a limited exception, is marital. Increases in value during the marriage to property acquired prior to marriage are considered marital in nature. Titling on property determined to be marital does not matter and said property can be divided by the court regardless of whose name it is in.

Prior to arriving at the actual division of a marital business asset, the parties must determine the value of a business. Contrary to popular belief, the value of any business is more that just looking at the assets/property and debt to arrive at a value from a balance sheet approach. Though this can be one facet of a business valuation, there is much more to the equation generally accepted by attorneys and courts in a Colorado divorce case. Beyond assessing assets and liabilities, a business valuation will entail an assessment of current and historical revenues and profits. This analysis also ties into the term "good will," which can be quantified into an actual dollar figure. We have seen cases in which there may be a two person professional operation in which one party or the other will say, "There's no value to the business; I am the business." Of course, this will be a statement made by a husband or wife who actually runs or owns the business. Conversely, the other party may find it meritorious to look into whether even a small business has value for asset division purposes. As part of the process, business valuators can also determine historical values, such as the value at the time of marriage or acquisition, as well as the current fair market value.

Continue reading "DENVER DIVORCE AND YOUR BUSINESS " »

May 14, 2013

Colorado Appellate Court Considers Great-Grandparent Visitation

333066_nana.jpgAn area that can present a cause for concern in Colorado child custody cases is the question of grandparent visitation. Can grandparents request visitation with their grandchildren through a judicial process just as a divorced parent asks for parenting time with his or her child? Colorado gives grandparents more legal rights than many states do, but these rights are still limited. A grandparent can bring a case to court only under certain circumstances.

Colorado Revised Statutes 19-1-117 controls this issue, stating that a grandparent can seek judicial recourse under such conditions as: (1) the parents are legally separated or divorced and there has been a child custody case, (2) custody of the child has been given to someone other than the parents, (3) the marriage of the parents is annulled, or (4) the child's parent who is the child of the grandparent dies.

Additionally, grandparents cannot sue for visitation merely because they are estranged from the parents. The grandparents bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that a parent who wants to deny them visitation is not acting in the child's best interests and also that visitation would be in the child's best interests.

Colorado courts also look at a parent's rights in these visitation cases. An unusual but instructive discussion came up in an appellate case earlier this year In re Parental Responsibilities, MDE. In that case, a great-grandmother sued for visitation under the grandparent statute when her granddaughter got a divorce.

Continue reading "Colorado Appellate Court Considers Great-Grandparent Visitation " »

May 1, 2013

DENVER CUSTODY: YOUR CHILD WON'T GO FOR VISITATION. WHAT DO YOU DO?

stock-photo-16278020-seperated.jpg


Denver custody and divorce attorneys see all types of cases related to child issues. This includes divorces with children, custody cases, cases involving modification of visitation, cases involving enforcement of existing visitation orders, and contempt of court cases. The parent/child relationship in one case will not be the same as in another. Though the general hope is that the bond between mother or father and the child is strong, the reality is that that bond can be strained for various reasons, whether related to the break up of the family, a child with behaviorial issues, a parent with challenges in terms of appropriately parenting, a parent engaged in child alienation, time, distance, or a child just getting older and spreading his or her wings. From a custody law standpoint, the question arises of "what do you do when your child doesn't want to go for visitation?" The answers vary, but there are steps to take to heal relationships, enforce your court orders, and to protect yourself if you are the primary custodial parent.

Though not extremely common, it is not that unusual to have a non-custodial parent entitled to parenting time indicate that a child, or children, do not want to come for visitation with him or her. Often times, the non-custodial parent will be left with no real explanation other than the other parent saying the kids are "angry," "afraid," "bored," "don't like your new spouse," etc. Of course, children are not always going to feel comfortable sharing those feelings with that parent, out of fear of hurting their feelings or upsetting them. The non-custodial parent is left in a postion of wondering what the right move is? Should they force the children to come, knowing they don't want to? Is the other parent doing something to influence the childr not to come? Will the court do anything? Court's are used to allegations from some custodial parents that the children don't want to go for visitation, for various reasons. Generally, the children's statements would be hearsay and not admissible in court. As such, the key to figuring out what is going on is counseling. Counseling in these types of situations can come in many forms. When a child doesn't want to go for parenting time, for whatever reason, one can try to get to the core of finding out why via getting the child into individual counseling?

From a problem solving standpoint, perhaps the more effective tool would be to get the child and non-custodial parent involved in reintegration or reunification counseling. This is joint counseling with parent and child designed to figure out what's going on and to work with both parent and child to get over the emotional or behavioral hurdles which have the child avoiding visitation. The sole focus of the reintegration therapy is to heal the relationship. Aside from situations in which a child is resisting parenting time, this type of counseling is also generally deemed appropriate by the courts in situations in which a parent has been absent for long periods of time. Above either parent's wishes or rights, a court wants to know that a child is emotionally safe and comfortable with visitation. As such, reintegration therapy will generally be the first, and hopefully last, step. Sadly, there are cases in which this therapy doesn't work. Neither parent or child may be willing to change their positions or behaviors. The custodial parent may be alienating the child from the other parent. These types of concerns will likely come out in the therapy and can also be dealt with via the court.

When your child does not want to come see you, the primary concern should be how to deal with things. Forcing the child in a non-therapeutic setting can only make things worse, particularly with teenagers. Additionally, parents must keep in mind that as kids get older, say 14 or 15 years of age, they will want more autonomy. Courts recognize this as well and once kids reach their mid-to-late teenage years, courts will often factor in their wishes when dealing with visitation. Again, forcing the issue can make the rift greater. With children this age, it is better to take things slowly, with the hope that they will see the light and come around once they reach adulthood. By this I mean that you shouldn't sacrifice your future relationship by forcing the issue in a highly aggressive manner today. The law affords remedies which one can avail himself or herself of. Don't give up. Just proceed with intelligence, and in a legally appropriate manner.

Continue reading "DENVER CUSTODY: YOUR CHILD WON'T GO FOR VISITATION. WHAT DO YOU DO? " »

April 10, 2013

DENVER DIVORCE AND CIVIL UNIONS

For years, we have listened to debates in the media regarding whether Colorado should, or should not, allow civil unions. The debate ended on March 21, 2013, when the Governor signed into law the Colorado Civil Unions Act, Senate Bill 13-011. Starting May 1, 2013, Colorado will allow civil unions. Under the new law, persons of the same or different gender will be able to enter into legally recognized unions. As civil unions are designed to be similar to marriage and allow the partners to such similar rights, it stands to reason that the new law will also have an impact in the area of divorce law. As a Denver family law attorney, I have started researching the subject and the coming changes, not only to educate myself, but to also prepare our firm to start handling cases involving the break up of civil unions. Just like marriages, people come together and grow apart. Just like in marriages, people fight. Now, just like marriages, there will be a legal process to get people through those break ups in an orderly, and legal, fashion.

The new Act, which will primarily be contained in Colorado Revised Statues, Title 14, Article 15, is full of new definitions, rules, and procedures. The Act contains language defining a civil union, indicating who can legally enter into one, setting forth the legal process for effectuating a union, and setting forth how to get out of one. Divorce law is generally set forth in C.R.S. Title 14, Article 10. Commencing May 1, 2013, Article 10 will now contain Section 106.5, which specifically states that the procedure for dissolving a civil union will be the same as the procedure for seeking a Colorado divorce.

Likewise, the new statute indicates that partners to a civil union will have the same rights as parties in a divorce case, meaning they will now have a family oriented forum to deal with issues of alimony(maintenance), property division, debt division, and other issues people will generally fight over in a divorce. Prior to the Act, people in a non-marriage situation, whether same sex or not, have been forced to litigate dividing up property in a regular civil court setting; and there was no right to alimony. Now they will be afforded a forum with more of a family law flare.

Once the law goes into effect, people will need to apply for a civil union license and register it in their county of abode. Once done, the State of Colorado will recognize the union and confer rights to the partners that might otherwise not be conferred in a boyfriend-girlfriend, girlfriend-girfriend, or boyfriend-boyfriend relationship. For Denver area divorce lawyers, this will certainly mean a new area of litigation. At the same time, those attorneys will already be fully aware of the substantive body of law which will apply to the dissolution of a civil union. The Act does contain language indicating that a marriage is still between a man and a woman. Rights and rules will be gender blind.

Under current law, same sex couples, just as couples of differing genders, can already fight for their rights regarding child support, custody, visitation, etc. in the domestic relations courts and under the domestic relations laws. As such, my immediate perception is that the law will likely have little impact on those types of issues. At the same time, one cannot anticipate all potential issues which may arise. Without much language on these subjects contained in the Act, as relates specifically to family law, the courts will likely be left to clean up any ambiguities or ommisions made by the legislature. Time will tell.

Continue reading "DENVER DIVORCE AND CIVIL UNIONS " »

March 25, 2013

COLORADO ALIMONY AND DIVORCE: POTENTIAL 2014 CHANGES (Part 2)

stock-photo-9923644-colorado-state-capitol.jpg

In February 2013, we published the first segment of this posting regarding potential changes coming to Colorado divorce law and the issue of alimony, more properly termed "maintenance." The rumors still persist among Denver area family law attorneys, that our alimony statutes will be changing, commencing 2014.

Part 1 of this post discussed changes related to the creating of a guideline table, similar to child support statutes, setting forth a framework for judges to look at related to lengths of time that an alimony award should run and percentage amounts to be received by the payee spouse. The posting also dicussed another potential change coming to the Colorado maintenance statute related to termination or suspension of maintenance based on the recipient co-habitating. In this Part 2 posting, the remaining significant, potential statutory changes to be discussed stemming from House Bill 13-1058 include definitions of income, provisions for the protection of persons not represented by an attorney, and a rebuttable presumption that retirement at "full retirment age" is a good faith basis, or reason, to modify a maintenance award.

Under the current alimony statute, C.R.S. 14-10-114, there is no concrete definition of income. In part, the current maintenance statute has deferred to C.R.S. 14-10-115 for such definition. If changed, the alimony statute will now have a definitive list of what is income for maintenance purposes, including language related to reductions for child support obligations, the ability for the court to impute income to someone, and definitions of volutary unemployment or under-employment. Like the child support statute, the list defining income is lengthy, and can include most sources, such as income from employment, self employment, retirement or pension pay, interest, dividends, Social Security payments, workmen's compensation, monetary gifts, lottery winnings and more. As practicing Colorado divorce lawyers, we have largely, though such has been somewhat unwritten, deferred to the child support statute for guidance as to what a court would, or might, consider income for alimony purposes anyway. That being said, it would now be set forth in black and white, for all to see, with little grey areas to argue over.

The next potential change to the Colorado maintenance statute relates to built in protections for a person not represented by an attorney. Currently, the courts have had the ability to step in and assert their input regarding whether an award of alimony, or the waiver of alimony, is fair. Cases in which a court will actually undo an agreement without one of the parties raising the issue are few and far between. I cannot say that I have ever actually seen a court disturb a maintenance agreement. Furthermore, when parties are waiving the right to receive maintenance, they are generally setting forth, whether in writing or orally in court, that they are freely and voluntarily making the waiver. If the House Bill is passed, courts will not be allowed to approve an agreement waiving maintenance or an agreement regarding maintenance which does not follow the guidelines, unless the unrepresented party has specifically indicated that he or she has been made aware of the guidelines. In practice, this will mean that attorneys will now need to make sure that they provide the other side, if unrepresented, with a copy of the guidelines prior to having them sign an agreement. In theory, if there are two parties to a divorce, both of whom have no attorney, they will need to do the same for the courts to approve any agreement. In essence, this creates a safeguard for people without attorneys. It also creates one more step that must be taken to get your divorce completed.

Continue reading "COLORADO ALIMONY AND DIVORCE: POTENTIAL 2014 CHANGES (Part 2) " »

February 28, 2013

Colorado Custody and Parenting Time Modifications Involving Complex Questions of Law

As Denver family law attorneys, the lawyers at Plog & Stein understand that life events happen after a court order is in place for child custody and visitation (referred to as parenting time). A parent's or parents' circumstances may have improved with a new or better-paying job, stable housing, or simply a good mental state. An improved status for the parent seems to equate better parenting for the child or children, but it is not always as simple as that for the Colorado court system - especially when the parties discussing custody include people who are not the child's or children's biological parents.

In the last year, an appellate decision, In re the Parental Responsibilities Concerning B.R.D., A Child, 2012 COA 63, No. 10CA2386, examined what factors needed to be present for a modification of a prior court order regarding decision-making and parenting time. In this case, the child had been placed for adoption by the mother shortly after his birth. She formally asked the court to place him for adoption and give up her parenting rights, and the couple proceeded with the adoption process. The biological father learned that he had a son several months later and opposed the adoption. The biological mother then decided to withdraw her request, causing the adopting couple to request the court that the biological parents' rights be terminated.

702367_page_curl_.jpgSubsequently the couple and the parents figured out an arrangement that gave the couple sole parental and decision-making responsibilities and parenting time to the biological parents throughout the week and weekends. The biological parents asked that they be allowed to seek modification in the future, and were ordered to pay child support to the couple. As more time passed, the biological parents grew closer to the boy and sought to have more time with him. Specifically, the father sought to have more time and greater say in the decision-making process regarding the son's life.

The lower court looked at the standard set in a case, In re Parental Responsibilities of M.J.K., 200 P.3d 1106 (Colo. App. 2008), to see whether continuing the original order that gave the couple the main care of the child and decision-making should continue. The Court found that it would not endanger the child and that it would be in the boy's best interests to keep the status quo because the change would potentially cause greater harm than benefit.

The father appealed and said that the Court looked at the wrong legal standard in its decision. The appellate body agreed and said that Colorado follows a presumption that the biological parent is a fit parent who will act in the boy's best interests. It would then be up to the couple to challenge the presumption and show that it wouldn't be in the boy's best interests for the father to have more time and decision making in put, and that it is in his interests for the order to remain in place as is.

Continue reading "Colorado Custody and Parenting Time Modifications Involving Complex Questions of Law " »