Total Divorce Blog

The State of Wisconsin may give pets custody-like rights when their ‘parents’ divorce. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that under a Wisconsin bill, pets would be included in a couple’s divorce decree. Soon to be ex-couples could specify, among other things, visitation rights and the right to move a pet out of state. If a couple cannot agree, the bill would give a judge Solomon-like power to choose one spouse or ship the pet off the local animal shelter. The Chronicle suggested whichever spouse got to the shelter first would then own the dog. A stranger could even adopt the pet before either spouse got there.

The bill’s lead author, Republican Representative Sheryl Albers said she is spearheading the bill because of her own messy divorce. She and her husband fought bitterly over who would get Sammi. The kids wanted the aged Labrador who suffered from incontinence. Neither spouse wanted the dog full time, though. Albers said the judge ordered that Sammi would follow the children. Whoever was caring for the kids, got the dog too. Unfortunately, Sammi did not travel well; “It was a relief” when the dog finally died.

Normally, states consider pets to be property. The Chronicle believes this bill to give pets rights, similar to children, to be the first of its kind in the nation.

In California you very rarely hear of a divorce for any other reason than “irreconcilable differences”.  Did you ever wonder why?

California is a no-fault divorce state.  Many states now have no-fault divorce laws which enable the parties to not engage in a battle over who caused the divorce.  In many cases this makes the process a lot quicker and much cheaper as well.  Neither party has to dig dirt on the other to prove anything.  They simply agree that they want to end the marriage, get a divorce and then they can fight over other things such as property division, child custody and support.

New York is the only state which still in all cases requires someone to be at fault in order to grant a quick divorce.  This means costs such as private investigator and hourly attorney’s fees can really add up.  If neither party in a marriage can provide proof of fault such as adultery or abuse then the parties must first agree to a legal separation and then live apart for a year before the divorce can be granted. 

These stringent divorce laws often lead to the parties agreeing in private that one of them will take the blame, just so the divorce can be done quickly.

There has been legislation in New York to enable a quicker, no-fault divorce process, but it did not make it through the state senate to become law.

East St. Louis Man Agrees to Second Divorce before Federal Sentencing

After his second wife filed for divorce on Monday, Metro East attorney Gary Peel did not have any objections and is now divorced. So what’s the big deal here? The Belleville News-Democrat reports details in Peel’s previous divorce that are quite interesting to say the least! Peel is facing federal prosecution for blackmail. It turns out that Peel originally did not want to meet the financial demands of his first wife Deborah Peel during their divorce in 2003. So what did Gary Peel do at the time? He attempted to blackmail his wife’s sister with naked pictures of her to pressure Deborah into backing off on her financial requests. If you’re wondering where Peel got the pictures, he had an affair with his wife’s sister in 1974 when she was a teenager. Peel is currently in jail without bond and awaiting sentencing this August for his convictions on possessing child pornography, obstructing justice and bankruptcy fraud.

Gary Peel’s second wife, Deborah Pontius, filed for divorce on Monday and a judge obliged with her request. Gary Peel then granted his second wife all of his stocks, stock options and personal property, which included the couple’s $375,000 home.

In honor of Father’s Day, Maxim has released a list of the worst celebrity dads.   It’s no surprise that Alex Baldwin makes the list, with his recorded rant against his pre-teen daughter fresh in our minds, but the father’s of some celebrity mess-ups made the list, too.  Dads of both Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan made the list, no doubt due in part to the recent DUIs their girls have garnered.

The Times Picayune is seeking to open the divorce records of a prominent councilman and his ex-wife based on the argument that a district court is violating both the Louisiana and the United States Constitution by keeping those records sealed. Of the 209 items pertaining to the divorce of Jefferson Parish Councilman John Young and former TV personality Mary Lou McCall, 195 of them currently can not be viewed. After being elected to the Parish Council in 2004, Young filed for divorce from his wife and sought that the records be sealed. The Louisiana Supreme Court will only let records be sealed on request when the right of privacy is greater than the public’s right to know and the only information to be sealed is so “sufficiently private” that it outweighs public disclosure. The Times Picayune has contested this second point in relation to this case and has claimed that the 24 District Court in Gentra is legally wrong to seal the records.

The newspaper request comes in the midst of a scandal surrounding Young’s new relationship with state Senator Julie Quinn. McCall has accused Quinn of slapping her eight year-old son that she had with Young. Quinn has denied the charge.

A Canadian judge has entered an unusual order in a criminal case:  the defendant may not “form a romantic relationship of an intimate nature with a female person” for the next three years.

Steven Cranley entered a guilty plea on charges stemming from a violent confrontation wiht his former girlfriend.  During that altercation Cranley reportedly punched and kicked the woman and ultimately stabbed himself with a butcher knife.  Doctors say that Cranley suffers from a dependent personality disorder and is unable to cope with rejection.

Cranley served 146 days in jail, and will undergo counseling while the girlfriend embargo is in place.

Unmarried couples living together are about to get equal rights in divorce. Cohabiting couples who decide to split will be able to make claims for property and alimony. Some American states provide divorce rights for common-law married couples. A couple can only be in a common-law marriage in the U.S. if they actually believe they are married. No such requirement would be necessary under England’s divorce laws.

At present, in the UK, cohabiting partners have no rights if their relationship breaks down, expect for child custody and support. Courts will have discretion in awarding property and alimony. Just like someone who is married, a cohabitee would have to show he or she will suffer financially as a result of the split.

The UK’s divorce reforms for unmarried couples will apply to both opposite and same-sex couples in “an intimate relationship.”

While certainly not the no-fault law that many people have been calling for, the New York State Assembly approved legislation on Wednesday that would shorten the divorce waiting period for people with formal separation agreements from one year to three months. Current New York divorce law is quite complicated and requires one party to blame the other using one of several “fault” grounds. If this does not happen, the couple must agree to a separation agreement and live apart for at least one year. On the other hand, a no-fault divorce law would allow a spouse to divorce by citing “irreconcilable differences” and essentially not require him or her to pit blame on the other party. Some people have called New York divorce laws out of date, and proponents of a no-fault law were not too thrilled with shortening the waiting period.

One no-fault proponent described his fears in a Newsday story that this recently approved legislation would hurt the political movement for a New York no-fault divorce law. On the other hand, Assemblywoman Helene Weinstein of Brooklyn sponsored this bill shortening the divorce waiting period and described it as a start in the right direction. This legislation would also required judges to consider a spouse’s loss of health insurance when determining property division and alimony. A similar bill is in the State Senate, and we’ll keep you updated with any more developments concerning this proposed divorce law in New York.

In one of the more stranger divorce cases in a long time, a California judge ruled against a man’s claims that his marriage was forced upon him by a brutal Cambodian dictator. A Recordnet.com story detailed how Saroeun Sok was married to his wife Sokhanary Ouch in Cambodia in 1978 during the communist regime of Pol Pot, who systematically forced couples to marry with the goal of weakening powerful family structures. Despite having three children with his wife and living with her for more than 25 years, Sok claimed that the marriage was against his intentions. Ouch disagreed with this claim and said that the couple had a romantic courtship which included Sok writing her love letters and choosing her ahead of other girls interested in him. San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge Robin Appell called Sok’s claims “almost incomprehensible” and awarded Ouch $250,000 in spousal support and other payments.

Appell wrote that Sok used this false divorce claim to leave his wife “financially destitute.” Before quitting and returning to Cambodia, Sok was a physician at San Joaquin General Hospital and earned $190,000 annually. Ouch earns $8.50 an hour as a housekeeper. Ouch’s divorce attorney Albert Ellis said in the story that Appell’s judgment will cover Sok’s retirement plan to make sure that his client receives the payments. We’ll keep you updated with any more developments with this strange divorce case.

On Tuesday, Total Divorce made a contribution to the Blog Catalog Donors Choose Challenge, matching all donations made during the first day of the challenge.

We’ve received some lovely acknowledgments from elementary school teachers embarking on new projects because of our contribution, and you can too! Some of the projects are very modest, and even small donations from just a few people could reach a lot of children.

The number of children benefitting from the challenge was already nearing 1,000 after the Total Divorce donation, and there’s one day left.