Uncategorized

Although I am a strong advocate for a process of amicable negotiation, there are circumstances when going to court is the best option.  For example:

• An uncooperative counterpart – when a court is necessary to compel a party to supply information that he/she is holding back, or a party refuses to, or is unlikely to negotiate in good faith. 
• Personality disorders – 
• Settling legal questions – if you prefer a narrower settlement based on established legal norms or setting new precedents.
• Desire for publicity

Under these conditions, the inability to reach resolution has little to do with issues but rather reflects the personalities, behaviors, and mental make-up of the parties.  Even a simple, straight forward issue can become contentious, defying settlement.

Going to court during a divorce can be a problematic path fraught with animosity and strife. Entrusting a judge with the power to make crucial decisions about one’s personal life can lead to unpredictable outcomes that may not align with either party’s desires. Moreover, the process can quickly become an excessive expense, both financially and emotionally, draining valuable resources that could be better spent on rebuilding lives. 

Regrettably, engaging in a courtroom battle often devolves into a protracted affair, consuming precious time that could be better invested in moving forward and finding closure. As such, it becomes increasingly evident that pursuing a divorce through litigation may not be the wisest course of action for those capable of seeking an amicable resolution. 

We recommend settling your NJ divorce through negotiation. Aspiring to an amicable negotiation – mediation, collaborative divorce, or a cooperative agreement –  can help you   negotiate all aspects of your settlement without regard to complexity.  

Post-divorce modifications may become necessary due to various changes in circumstances that affect child custody, parenting time, child support, or spousal support. These modifications help ensure that the existing arrangements continue to meet the evolving needs and circumstances of the individuals involved. 

When negotiating post-divorce modifications, the couple must maintain open and respectful communication. They should approach the process with a cooperative mindset, focusing on the children’s best interests or fair outcomes. Seeking the guidance of attorneys  can provide clarity, 

1. Child Custody and Parenting Time: When facing changes in circumstances, such as a parent’s relocation or a need for revised parenting time schedule,  a modification may be necessary.  This  involves negotiating new terms, reassessing the child’s best interest while preserving a healthy co-parenting dynamic.
2. Child Support: Adjustments to child support obligations may become necessary if there are substantial changes in income, employment status, or the child’s needs. Seeking a modification can help ensure that the financial support aligns with the current circumstances and effectively serves the child’s welfare.
3. Spousal Support/Alimony: Significant changes in the financial situation of either spouse, such as job loss, promotion, or cohabitation, may warrant modifications to spousal support payments. Revisiting the terms of spousal support ensures fairness and reflects the current financial realities of both parties.
4. Relocation: If one parent intends to relocate, it requires modifying parenting time to accommodate the new living situation. Courts typically evaluate the move’s impact on the child and the existing custody arrangements before approving or modifying the terms.

The most successful post-divorce modification results start with respect and transparency.   This type of negotiation is my specialty, and I would be happy to talk to you about the specifics of your situation.  

Many parents start the divorce process by declaring that they would like to keep the marital home after the divorce. Even with the strongest of financial positions, sometimes it is best to wait to make any significant decisions until after you have all the information to consider the multiple issues and possibilities for settlement. A key objective is to make informed decisions.    Your house is just one piece of your balance sheet, and the decision to keep or sell cannot be made in isolation.  As I often say, “the finances reveal what you can and cannot do and where there may be valuable tradeoffs.”    

When parents make the statement that they want to keep the home, I immediately ask, “why?” Most of the time, a parent would like to be the one who provides stability for the children. The mom or dad wants to make sure that the child’s life is not disrupted and that they can stay in the same school with the same friends. However, keeping the home is not the only way to create stability for your children. Most importantly, keeping a home you cannot afford or do not actually want is a surefire way to create instability for your kids.   

The marital home is usually a couple’s biggest asset. Unless you have a prenup or other agreement, both of you own 50% of the equity in the house. As an example, if your home is worth 1 million dollars and your mortgage is at $500,000, you each own $250,000 of the equity in the house. And this is where your divorce gets interesting as we determine what you are willing to give to your spouse. You may have an investment account worth $500,000 that your spouse can take. But then this “trade” would leave you with zero savings. There may be a vacation home your spouse will take, but then he does not have a place to stay near the kids. You can see where this gets tricky. 

The next big consideration is removing the spouse leaving the house from the mortgage. We need to make sure that the spouse keeping the house has the resources (qualified income and credit) to refinance successfully. We work together as a team to ensure that agreements and plans are going to work for everyone. Additionally, we take care to ensure that there is smooth sailing through the process (i.e., if the refinance is denied, then what do we do?).  

As a group, we want to make sure that the spouse staying in the house can afford not only the mortgage but also the taxes, bills, and upkeep. It is never a good financial idea to “go for broke” without an emergency fund or the ability to save for the future.  

There are other options if you want to keep the kids in the house, such as maintaining joint ownership. Here too, there are many details that need to be worked out to see if it is a viable option, especially since anything could happen after the divorce, and it is best to separate all finances.   

If you and your spouse realize you both need to sell the house, we can talk about the best ways to do that as well. For instance, who is going to make decisions on a realtor, asking price, any repairs after inspections, final accommodations of the buyer, and then the actual sale price. In a heated divorce battle selling a home can be a nightmare. Committing to a quick and peaceful sale will ensure the process is smooth.  

In conclusion, keeping the house after a divorce is a decision to be made by a couple and will take into consideration the decision of your marital assets, the cost of carrying the house, as well as future financial positions. Much will depend on your interests and preferences.