Law and Justice

Posts Tagged ‘Myriad’

There are a number of different issues that arise as part of divorce proceedings. No divorce can or will be finalized by the family court until all the relevant issues are finally resolved, whether by way of a settlement agreement or through a trial. Most divorce cases do not make it to trial, unless each and every issue is highly contested. If you are one of those people, be aware that such a divorce will end up costing a lot of money in attorney’s fees and costs. Most divorces are resolved through a settlement agreement, often called a Marital Settlement Agreement. Your Twin Cities law firm will help guide your case to a settlement that is reasonable and relatively satisfactory to all parties and which addresses each and every applicable issue.

One of the issues that are dealt with in divorce proceedings is the division of property and financial assets, and then their distribution. As your Twin Cities law firm will inform you, you and your spouse will need to document any and all assets you held together during the marriage that is not legally deemed separate property. Separate property is any property that was brought into the marriage, or was received by gift or inheritance during the marriage. Any other property that was “earned” or purchased during the marriage or towards which marital earnings were paid will be subject to a 50-50 division. Bank accounts, 401(k) and profit sharing assets, car values, personal property values, such as your furniture and electronics in your home, and the value of your home if you own your home are all assets that will likely need to be divided. Of course, you cannot cut up the TV or the house.

As such, the value of each asset is determined and then divided such that each side retains items that represent 50% of that value. With homes, typically one spouse keeps the home and the other spouse retains other assets that equal the value of the home. When that is not possible or desirable, the family home is sold with each spouse receiving one half of the proceeds. The spouses will also have to share 50% each in the marital debt that accumulated during the marriage. Spousal support will also typically be awarded in a divorce to the lower earning spouse. In addition, the lower earning spouse can sometimes get the higher earning spouse to pay all or a portion of their Twin Cities law firm attorney’s fees.

Aside from property division and spousal support, a major issue that comes up in divorce is custody of any children from the marriage. This is always the most sensitive issue in a divorce. This is something that you will need to heavily lean on your Twin Cities law firm, who can not only advise you on your rights and how the courts typically address custody, visitation and child support, but can also provide you with the emotional support you will likely need. The courts will always rule in favor of what is in the best interests of the child. If that means they live with mom and visit with dad, then that will happen. They will often look to see what type of custody and visitation has been taking place since the couple have separated as well as who has been the primary caregiver to the children. The age of the children is also a factor. The custodial parent will usually receive some child support with the amount being dependent upon the amount of time the custodial parent has the children and the difference between the incomes of the custodial parent and the non-custodial parent.

As you can see, there are many aspects to a divorce that require the expertise and guidance of a Twin Cities law firm specializing in this area of the law. It is always wise to hire an attorney to handle your divorce, but this is especially so when there are children involved. Children become such an emotionally charged issue in a divorce and your attorney will best be able to help work through it and do what is best for your children in the end.

Brown Family Law is a Twin Cities Law Firm of experienced divorce lawyers and attorneys focusing on Divorce and Family Law cases. Our Lawyers represent clients throughout Minneapolis and the Twin Cities area. Call or contact us or visit our Blog – http://www.mnfamilylawblog.com/ – for advice and guidance in contested divorce, uncontested divorce, child custody cases, child support, and more.

Courts make determinations in law and in equity. By ‘in law’ is meant following a specific law – constitutional law, state law, etc. By ‘in equity’ is meant determining what is ‘fair’ to do where now law specifically rules. An example is determining how to distribute the assets in a divorce among the husband and wife.

Common law refers to the myriad of decisions made by judges and appeals courts. Maxims of Common Law are ‘guiding truths’. Adhering to them helps judges make fairer decisions. They’re ignored in family court determinations since fairness is a wholly secondary issue. This article overviews what these maxims are.

Maxims are absolutely essential to the preservation of rights and fair treatment to all litigants. Maxims:

* represent ‘self-evident’ truth – as mentioned in our Declaration of Independence when it referred to ‘all men’ as being created equal.

* serve to guide judicial determinations in the same way that ‘axioms’ guide the analysis of mathematical determinations

* promotes fair dealing and unbiased justice – a clearly essential issue in the purpose of courts

Courts, primarily established to enforce the principles of common law, are bound by common law rules of equity that should be grounded in the never-changing maxims. This grounding serves to restrain the court’s wanton discretion in equity law determinations.

Examples of Maxims:

Let’s take a look at some examples to see the nature of maxims -as self-evidently fair. Here’s an important one:

*The certainty of a thing arises only from making a thing certain.

This implies that the court should seek clear proof of allegations made against someone and not rule on just the allegations or weakly supported ones. Family court ignores these maxims all the time.

*The safety of the people cannot be judged but by the safety of every individual.

Laws which supposedly protect the safety of some people at the expense of other people’s rights violate this maxim. A clear example of such a violation is present day domestic restraining order laws which are rampantly and unjustly imposed upon so many fathers.

*Law is unjust where it is uncertain or vague in its meaning.

Laws should be clear so that one knows precisely when he’s breaking such a law. Remember the violation of laws brings consequences on those who violate them. Vague laws are considered unconstitutional. An example of vague standard of law is the ‘best interest of the child’ standard – used to unjustly deny fit fathers custody of their children.

*The Burden of Proof lies on him who asserts the fact -not on him who denies it.

This is based on the fact that you can’t prove a negative. Courts that force people to prove a negative are examples of kangaroo courts. Family courts jail fathers when they can’t prove that they don’t have money to pay!

*No one should be believed except upon his oath.

This simply means that anyone who will give testimony must be sworn in. That way he can be charged with perjury – which is a felony (a serious crime) – if he can be found to be intentionally lying. No ‘swearing in’ means no perjury and no penalty for lying.

*Perjured witnesses should be punished for perjury and for the crimes they falsely accuse against him.

This is the bottom line of enforcing honesty in court testimony. Unfortunately perjury is almost never punished -allowing the degradation of court integrity – so obvious in family court.

*Every home is a castle; though the winds of heaven blow through it, officers of the state cannot enter.

This is from English common law which made a man’s home sacrosanct. It should still be true. It requires officers to have warrants to enter a home. A warrant is permission from a judge based on good cause to enter a home.

*No man should profit by his own wrong or, He who does not have clean hands, cannot benefit from the law

This is self-evident. An extreme case is the child that pleads mercy because he’s an orphan – but only because he murdered his parents.

*He who uses his legal rights harms no one.

But, fathers are routinely punished by seeking their rights in family court.

*No one is punished unless for some wrong act or fault.

But forced into the noncustodial status for doing no wrong would be considered punishment by any reasonable person.

*It’s natural that he who bears the charge of a thing, should receive the profits.

If you have all the obligations for something but none of the benefits, then you are a slave.

Fathers who go to family court observe clear violations of these maxims all the time. Such violations mean that there is a tyranny taking place.

Incoming search terms: