Strategically helping Colorado clients through divorce & custody cases
Published on:

waste-paper-1240618By: Curtis Wiberg

During a divorce proceeding, or in a post-decree modification proceeding, issues related to a spouse’s income or assets are often disputed, especially when one spouse suspects the other spouse is hiding income or assets from them.

Typically, bank records and income information is disclosed through the mandatory financial disclosure process of Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 16.2, or (if you have need to review many months worth of financial documents) through the process of discovery as outlined in Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure 33 and 34. These rules of civil procedure, however, operate on the premise that the spouse will abide by their duty to disclose requested or required information. Some spouses, whether through dishonesty, indifference, or neglect, do not abide by their duty to disclose (or fully disclose) their information as required under these rules.  

The spouse who does not disclose information as required is vulnerable to significant sanctions, and these sanctions often are sufficient to protect the spouse seeking this information.  However, if production of documents remains necessary, a party’s right to subpoena documents exists under a different, C.R.C.P. Rule 45. Continue reading

Published on:

handshake-1238138-300x200By:  Sarah McCain

I recently read an article listing current divorce statistics and providing eight divorce horror stories from both the client and the lawyer’s perspective. The stories ranged from issues with excessive fees, fraud, disappearing spouses, and those with a second life. While these stories are obviously extreme examples, what connected these parties was the initial thought in those cases that the other side would be reasonable. That is a common statement and one that we hear in our office on quite a frequent basis. Unfortunately, it does not always work that way. However, there are steps that you can take to ensure that both you and your lawyer are prepared for your case, no matter what form it takes. Below are a couple of suggestions which may assist you along the process. Continue reading

Published on:

unique-1-1209075By Michelle L. Searcy

In my most recent article, I discussed methods of your assuring separate property remains separate in terms of preserving good evidence for use in a dissolution of marriage (divorce) case.  However, Colorado statutes still define marital property as including increases in the value of separate property during the marriage.  Since often separate property consists of investment assets, this results not only in the difficulty in proving pre-marital value but in the possibility of being required to pay the other spouse their share of the increase in value.  In this blog post, I will discuss how parties to a marriage and/or divorce can avoid such difficulties through valid marital agreements. Continue reading

Published on:

law-series-4-1467436-300x226By:  Jessica A. Saldin

In prior, recent blog posts, I overviewed both the impact the federal tax changes will have on maintenance (alimony) awards starting January 2019, as well as the revisions to Colorado’s maintenance and child support laws to account for the tax code changes.  The purpose of this blog post is to provide concrete examples of the difference between the pre-August-2018 maintenance and child support laws and the new ones which started this month.  

Since the statutory changes are going to have more of an effect on maintenance awards entered after December 31, 2018 (any maintenance awards entered before that date would remain tax deductible for the payor) this blog post will use the 2019 minimum wage amount for the first scenario.  Beginning January 1, 2019, Colorado minimum wage increases to $11.10 per hour.  This is most applicable for situations where a party is not working and can be imputed income (see prior blog posts to determine when this may be appropriate). Continue reading

Published on:

hello-my-name-is-1244204-300x214By: Janette Jordan

There are two types of name changes that occur in a family law case: the restoration of the Wife’s name to her maiden name or other previous name and the changing of the name of a minor child in a divorce or custody case.

In a divorce case, if you are the party seeking to have your maiden or other name restored you should indicate such in either the divorce petition or the response, depending on your status in the case. That being said, you do not have to make the decision right away, but it helps to indicate from the beginning that this is something you are considering.  So long as you raise the issue with the court prior to the decree of dissolution entering you can change your name as part of the proceedings.  It should be noted that the other side has no say or control in terms of your requested name change.  Fortunately, statute (C.R.S. 14-10-120.2) also authorizes the filing of a request to restore a maiden name after the decree enters, should someone change their mind later on. Continue reading

Published on:

racing-2-1514432-300x226By: W. Curtis Wiberg

In a divorce case, a higher income earning spouse may be “on the hook”  to pay maintenance (alimony) and child support. There are divorces, however, in which this higher income earning spouse is in his or her sixties and nearing retirement age. Some dads have children when they are in their fifties, or later. In other cases, a divorcing couple, after a longer term marriage, splits up after their children are adults, thereby leaving spousal maintenance as the sole support issue to be determined.  The question arises in these cases as to whether that higher income earning spouse is going to be able to retire when reaching retirement age or whether the law requires that spouse to keep the income rolling in regardless of that his or her age.  Prior to changes in statute, there was already case law supporting the notion that there was a valid correlation between retirement and modifying support obligations. Statute now codifies such notions.

The Colorado Legislature has addressed this issue in C.R.S. 14-10-122, which states:

Published on:

unique-1-1209075By: Michelle L. Searcy

In Colorado, everything acquired by either party during a marriage is presumed to be marital property regardless of title or possession, with a few limited exceptions.  Section 14-10-113(2), C.R.S. lists those exceptions as:

 

 

 

  1. Property acquired by gift, bequest, devise or descent;
  2. Property acquired in exchange for property acquired in exchange for property acquired by gift, bequest, devise or descent;
  3. Property acquired by a spouse after a decree of legal separation; and 
  4. Property excluded by valid agreement of the parties.

Therefore, if your Great Aunt died and left you her car, it is your separate property.  If you trade that car in for another car of equal or lesser value, the replacement car is separate property.  A legal separation likewise protects your interest in property you obtained after the decree of separation is entered.  The final exception requires that the parties voluntarily entered into a marital agreement (post-nuptial agreement) that complies with all of the requirements of section 14-2-309 that was made at a time when the parties intended to remain married.  Regardless of exceptions, your actions can potentially lead to your separate property in a divorce being considered marital.  Continue reading

Published on:

blank-survey-template-1-1236429-300x200By: Stephen J. Plog

In many Colorado divorce and child custody cases, it’s not uncommon to see situations in which one party or the other fails to follow the court’s orders, whether financial or child related in nature.   When orders are not followed, the aggrieved party is left with various remedies to consider, one of which is filing a motion and affidavit for contempt of court pursuant to Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 107.

The filing of a motion for contempt of court essentially entails setting forth allegations within the motion alleging that there are court orders in place, that the other party is aware of the court orders, that the other party has failed to follow those court orders, and that that party had/has the ability to follow the relevant, violated court orders.   Once filed, the court will give the contempt motion a prima facia review, after which it will normally issue a citation instructing the violating party to appear in court, at a certain time, to answer as to the allegations.   The initial hearing is generally for advisement purposes, at which time the accused will plead guilty or not guilty.  If “not guilty” is the plea then an evidentiary hearing will be set, to take place a few weeks, or months, down the road. Continue reading

Published on:

license-wall-5-1445048-300x222By: Curtis Wiberg

In our mobile society, it is not an uncommon occurrence for parents to obtain custody orders in one state, and for both parents and the children to later reside in other states, soon after.  This can make resolution of subsequent conflicts involving parenting time (visitation) complicated.

Every state in the country has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) to address these parenting time or custody issues that involve multiple states, which gives parents and courts predictability as these multi-state issues arise.

Generally speaking, the UCCJEA provides a series of guidelines such that only one state can have subject matter jurisdiction or authority to determine custody orders at a time.  This is known as the “home state”, and it is usually determined by the state where a minor child has resided for the most recent six continuous months prior to the initial court custody filing.  Once a state assumes home state jurisdiction, that home state has exclusive home state jurisdiction to modify custody orders until such time as both parents and the children no longer reside in the home state, or because the home state becomes an inconvenient forum and gives up it’s exclusive jurisdiction.   Interstate jurisdictional authorization for a court to establish, modify, or enforce a child custody order differs, depending on the circumstances. Continue reading

Published on:

denver-capitol-hill-1620432-300x199By:  Jessica A. Saldin

Starting August 8, 2018, there will some statutory changes being made to the Colorado Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act (the main statute/law that governs Colorado divorce and custody cases).  As these changes may have major impacts on your divorce or custody case, it is important to know what they are.  A few of the statutes are undergoing minor word changes, which are not being discussed in this article.  The major changes, which will be the primary focus of this article, affect the statutes governing spousal maintenance and child support.

C.R.S. 14-10-114 is the statute that governs maintenance (often called spousal support or alimony).  As discussed in a prior blog post, the federal tax code is changing in 2019, with an impact on how maintenance payments are treated for tax purposes.  It used to be that a payor’s maintenance payments were tax deductible to the payor and a recipient’s maintenance payments had to be claimed on the recipient’s taxes as income.  Starting in 2019, the recipient will not have to declare maintenance payments as income; however, the paying party will not get a deduction for maintenance paid.  As mentioned in the prior post, such was anticipated to have an effect on Colorado’s maintenance law because the formula was created with the understanding that maintenance would be tax deductible and taxable, respectively.  As anticipated, the Colorado legislature has made changes to Colorado’s maintenance law to account for these federal tax changes. Continue reading