Sacramento Family Law Blog

Divorcing a spouse with a substance abuse problem can involve complex emotions. You certainly feel some anger and resentment, but you may also understand the overpowering control an addiction can have over your spouse. These matters can be even more complicated if you have children.

If your spouse was able to demonstrate to the court that he or she could control the addiction, the court may have ordered some form of shared custody or visitation. While this may have worked for a while, if you are noticing signs that your ex has returned to drugs or alcohol, you have justifiable reasons for concern over the safety and wellbeing of your children.

The divorce laws in California are predicated on the assumption that both spouses will provide a complete and accurate financial disclosure to the other spouse. This assumption cannot always be trusted if the divorce involves a high-asset couple. Humans being humans, some may find that the instinct to hide assets from the other spouse to avoid sharing those assets is strong. This instinct can lead one or both parties to wrongfully attempt to hide significant assets from the other party.

The assets most commonly hidden are cash, bonds, mutual fund accounts, cash value in insurance policies, annuities, stocks and bearer municipal bonds. Assets can be hidden in several ways. One of the most common gambits is the transfer of ownership to a third party, such as a foreign bank. Another common method is the creation of a fictional entity to take possession. Repayment of phony or exaggerated debts to family members is another common method. A spouse who is the sole owner of a small business may use such an entity to retain income that is, in fact, a marital asset.

When a divorcing California couple turns to valuing their assets, one of the most difficult issues is the value of a jointly owned business. Many couples start small businesses early in their marriage and devote significant energy to making the business a success. Whether the success is modest or significant, the value of the company can add significant stress to settling property division issues, especially if the couple is looking at a high-asset divorce. One of the most efficient ways of determining the value of a business is to hire an experienced business appraiser.

Many people wonder why an appraiser is necessary in a community property state. After all, isn't the business divided equally between the spouses? The answer in theory is "yes," but businesses often cannot be neatly sliced in half. Some businesses must be sold, either to a third party or to the other spouse. In such transactions, both parties will want to know whether the price is fair.

People who begin a divorce proceeding often view the entry of the final order by the court as the last step, and they are often unprepared for events that may follow. One of the most common of these unexpected events is the decision of one spouse to move from California to another state. If the couple has no minor children, such a move may have little or no impact. But if the couple has minor children who are the beneficiaries of an order for child support, the move to another state by one spouse or the other may have the potential for disrupting the provisions entered by the divorce court regarding child and spousal support.

This disruption is caused by the joint difficulties of obtaining jurisdiction over the spouse who has moved and then enforcing an order requiring the ex-spouse to make all delinquent payments. California and the other states took a significant precaution against such disruption by enacting the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act. This statute, with minor modifications from state to state, establishes uniform procedures by which a spouse entitled to receive child support can commence an action in the state where the former spouse resides to obtain an order compelling the ex-spouse to make all delinquent support payments.