What is fair in this divorce?

[Anonymous]

I was getting divorced in DC in 2021. From my lawyer: equitable distribution in practice is 50/50 by default. A spouse would have to go to court prove that they contributed significantly more over the course of marriage, but even then it would be probably 55-60% share of assets but no way 1/3! And DC in fact counts marital assets even during separation until divorce is official. Info from top Maryland and DC attorneys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was getting divorced in DC in 2021. From my lawyer: equitable distribution in practice is 50/50 by default. A spouse would have to go to court prove that they contributed significantly more over the course of marriage, but even then it would be probably 55-60% share of assets but no way 1/3! And DC in fact counts marital assets even during separation until divorce is official. Info from top Maryland and DC attorneys

well were you in a short childless marriage with someone who earned 4x more than you? 50-50 may be the “default” but the facts here do not support 50-50 and it would be insane to think that OP’s husband will roll over and give her 50% in mediation. Because they are not bargaining from the position of a theoretical fact-free default, but from what a judge would actually do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should get what you contributed, that’s fair.

It doesn't work that way because marriage is a contract and marital property is owned jointly, no matter who worked for pay to accumulate it.

OP, you need a lawyer and you should walk away with half.

Completely wrong legally. What was acquired individually PRIOR to the marriage stays with that individual.
What was jointly acquired after the marriage is up for 50% consideration.
Many greedy marriage partners think that they are unreasonably entitled to half and then they find out they are sadly mistaken..

Yes, that is what I said. What is acquired during the marriage is "marital property." I did not make any reference to what was acquired individually prior to the marriage.

In an equitable distribution state, things are not divided 50/50, they are divided fairly. So if one person has more assets outside the marriage that they will retain, the other person might get more than 50% of the marital assets unless there is some cause like a adultery or abuse that should grant them less.

MD/DC/VA are no fault states so even adultery doesn't matter.

Not a lawyer but I think VA is a fault state if there is fault at play.

[Anonymous]

You are likely going to get much much more than if you had stayed single and never married him in the first place. I'm sure he brought much savings into the marriage, which is then considered non-marital property which he gets to keep.
You are lucky you don't have children with him- that would make it 10x more complicated for the rest of your life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are likely going to get much much more than if you had stayed single and never married him in the first place. I'm sure he brought much savings into the marriage, which is then considered non-marital property which he gets to keep.
You are lucky you don't have children with him- that would make it 10x more complicated for the rest of your life.

Eh OP will deserve every penny she gets. She wasted 4 years supporting him, probably took a hit to her own career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should get what you contributed, that’s fair.

It doesn't work that way because marriage is a contract and marital property is owned jointly, no matter who worked for pay to accumulate it.

OP, you need a lawyer and you should walk away with half.

Completely wrong legally. What was acquired individually PRIOR to the marriage stays with that individual.
What was jointly acquired after the marriage is up for 50% consideration.
Many greedy marriage partners think that they are unreasonably entitled to half and then they find out they are sadly mistaken..

Yes, that is what I said. What is acquired during the marriage is "marital property." I did not make any reference to what was acquired individually prior to the marriage.

In an equitable distribution state, things are not divided 50/50, they are divided fairly. So if one person has more assets outside the marriage that they will retain, the other person might get more than 50% of the marital assets unless there is some cause like a adultery or abuse that should grant them less.

MD/DC/VA are no fault states so even adultery doesn't matter.

Not a lawyer but I think VA is a fault state if there is fault at play.

It is. But “fault” is a high bar, which makes it expensive. OP and her DH would likely deplete their cash savings proving/defending fault.

OP, you are entitled to 50 percent of what was earned during the marriage. So half of your combined savings/equity/portfolio growth in the past four years. Your respective salaries don’t play into it.

He is entitled to what he brought in, and you are entitled to what you brought in.

So do this math: value of assets today (including both retirements, cash savings, equity, the value of the business you started during the marriage) minus the total value of all assets on your wedding day. Then divide by two. That is your share.

If I were you, I would knock $25k off your share to account for legal fees if you had to go to mediation. That’s your offer. You might want to preemptively horse trade on assets to keep things simple (for example, he keeps his 401k, and you take more cash).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should get what you contributed, that’s fair.

It doesn't work that way because marriage is a contract and marital property is owned jointly, no matter who worked for pay to accumulate it.

OP, you need a lawyer and you should walk away with half.

Completely wrong legally. What was acquired individually PRIOR to the marriage stays with that individual.
What was jointly acquired after the marriage is up for 50% consideration.
Many greedy marriage partners think that they are unreasonably entitled to half and then they find out they are sadly mistaken..

Yes, that is what I said. What is acquired during the marriage is "marital property." I did not make any reference to what was acquired individually prior to the marriage.

In an equitable distribution state, things are not divided 50/50, they are divided fairly. So if one person has more assets outside the marriage that they will retain, the other person might get more than 50% of the marital assets unless there is some cause like a adultery or abuse that should grant them less.

MD/DC/VA are no fault states so even adultery doesn't matter.

Not a lawyer but I think VA is a fault state if there is fault at play.

It is. But “fault” is a high bar, which makes it expensive. OP and her DH would likely deplete their cash savings proving/defending fault.

OP, you are entitled to 50 percent of what was earned during the marriage. So half of your combined savings/equity/portfolio growth in the past four years. Your respective salaries don’t play into it.

He is entitled to what he brought in, and you are entitled to what you brought in.

So do this math: value of assets today (including both retirements, cash savings, equity, the value of the business you started during the marriage) minus the total value of all assets on your wedding day. Then divide by two. That is your share.

If I were you, I would knock $25k off your share to account for legal fees if you had to go to mediation. That’s your offer. You might want to preemptively horse trade on assets to keep things simple (for example, he keeps his 401k, and you take more cash).

OMG. Will everyone who is saying this please STFU.

OP if you want to get a baseline understanding of what your legal entitlement is, you need to speak with a lawyer. It doesn’t have to be that expensive - just say you want a rough understanding before mediation of how the courts divide assets in a case like yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you've been through hell and I personally think what is "fair" is for you to get almost it all - he will be able to replace it quickly and i imagine you spent tremendous time and energy trying to help him and deserve some security in your life when you walk away

but i'd probably accept 1/3 to be done with it. a contentious battle could easily eat up more than that in legal fees.

Fair isn’t really the issue. She gets half of assets accumulated during the short marriage. There’s no compensation for “stress” or whatever. Judge doesn’t care and a lawyer will tell you that. Nor does a judge care that he can make it back quickly in the future. The law doesn’t work this way and the sooner you understand that the better.

You get nothing of the $200,000 down payment on the condo except what you contributed to it. You said it was mostly from him. So if you put in $10,000 and he put in $190,000, that’s what you get. Plus 50/50 of any equity, should there be any after costs.

You get half of any savings accumulated during the marriage. If any of that $100,000 in savings was there before the marriage, back that out.

No she won’t get 1/2 of the saving unless she can show she contributed 1/2.

No, that is a marital asset and will be split evenly. Unless some portion of that savings existed before they said “I do.”

The proportion of who contributed what DURING the marriage isn’t relevant. Those assets get divided 50/50 as they were a joint unit.

IT IS NOT 50-50 UNLESS IN COMMUNITY PROPERTY STATE

It isn’t default 50/50. But it certainly can be. And might be here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are likely going to get much much more than if you had stayed single and never married him in the first place. I'm sure he brought much savings into the marriage, which is then considered non-marital property which he gets to keep.
You are lucky you don't have children with him- that would make it 10x more complicated for the rest of your life.

Eh OP will deserve every penny she gets. She wasted 4 years supporting him, probably took a hit to her own career.

Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you've been through hell and I personally think what is "fair" is for you to get almost it all - he will be able to replace it quickly and i imagine you spent tremendous time and energy trying to help him and deserve some security in your life when you walk away

but i'd probably accept 1/3 to be done with it. a contentious battle could easily eat up more than that in legal fees.

Fair isn’t really the issue. She gets half of assets accumulated during the short marriage. There’s no compensation for “stress” or whatever. Judge doesn’t care and a lawyer will tell you that. Nor does a judge care that he can make it back quickly in the future. The law doesn’t work this way and the sooner you understand that the better.

You get nothing of the $200,000 down payment on the condo except what you contributed to it. You said it was mostly from him. So if you put in $10,000 and he put in $190,000, that’s what you get. Plus 50/50 of any equity, should there be any after costs.

You get half of any savings accumulated during the marriage. If any of that $100,000 in savings was there before the marriage, back that out.

No she won’t get 1/2 of the saving unless she can show she contributed 1/2.

No, that is a marital asset and will be split evenly. Unless some portion of that savings existed before they said “I do.”

The proportion of who contributed what DURING the marriage isn’t relevant. Those assets get divided 50/50 as they were a joint unit.

IT IS NOT 50-50 UNLESS IN COMMUNITY PROPERTY STATE

It isn’t default 50/50. But it certainly can be. And might be here.

Doubtful

[Anonymous]

Is this the DH who had the unexplained seizures and at the time you didn’t realize it was related to alcohol? And it was dcum who kind of guided you toward what was really happening?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you've been through hell and I personally think what is "fair" is for you to get almost it all - he will be able to replace it quickly and i imagine you spent tremendous time and energy trying to help him and deserve some security in your life when you walk away

but i'd probably accept 1/3 to be done with it. a contentious battle could easily eat up more than that in legal fees.

Fair isn’t really the issue. She gets half of assets accumulated during the short marriage. There’s no compensation for “stress” or whatever. Judge doesn’t care and a lawyer will tell you that. Nor does a judge care that he can make it back quickly in the future. The law doesn’t work this way and the sooner you understand that the better.

You get nothing of the $200,000 down payment on the condo except what you contributed to it. You said it was mostly from him. So if you put in $10,000 and he put in $190,000, that’s what you get. Plus 50/50 of any equity, should there be any after costs.

You get half of any savings accumulated during the marriage. If any of that $100,000 in savings was there before the marriage, back that out.

No she won’t get 1/2 of the saving unless she can show she contributed 1/2.

No, that is a marital asset and will be split evenly. Unless some portion of that savings existed before they said “I do.”

The proportion of who contributed what DURING the marriage isn’t relevant. Those assets get divided 50/50 as they were a joint unit.

IT IS NOT 50-50 UNLESS IN COMMUNITY PROPERTY STATE

It isn’t default 50/50. But it certainly can be. And might be here.

No it really might not, not unless OP wants to go scorched earth an threatened him with public exposure of his alcoholism. An offer of 35% would probably get her to 25% and let everyone move on quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was getting divorced in DC in 2021. From my lawyer: equitable distribution in practice is 50/50 by default. A spouse would have to go to court prove that they contributed significantly more over the course of marriage, but even then it would be probably 55-60% share of assets but no way 1/3! And DC in fact counts marital assets even during separation until divorce is official. Info from top Maryland and DC attorneys

well were you in a short childless marriage with someone who earned 4x more than you? 50-50 may be the “default” but the facts here do not support 50-50 and it would be insane to think that OP’s husband will roll over and give her 50% in mediation. Because they are not bargaining from the position of a theoretical fact-free default, but from what a judge would actually do.

I think the 50-50 referred to marital assets. In no court anywhere is OP entitled to half of her husband’s pre-marital assets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was getting divorced in DC in 2021. From my lawyer: equitable distribution in practice is 50/50 by default. A spouse would have to go to court prove that they contributed significantly more over the course of marriage, but even then it would be probably 55-60% share of assets but no way 1/3! And DC in fact counts marital assets even during separation until divorce is official. Info from top Maryland and DC attorneys

well were you in a short childless marriage with someone who earned 4x more than you? 50-50 may be the “default” but the facts here do not support 50-50 and it would be insane to think that OP’s husband will roll over and give her 50% in mediation. Because they are not bargaining from the position of a theoretical fact-free default, but from what a judge would actually do.

I think the 50-50 referred to marital assets. In no court anywhere is OP entitled to half of her husband’s pre-marital assets.

*and they are also wrong about marital assets.* the ONLY place marital assets are split 50-50 per law is community property states. DC, MD and VA are equitable division states. Equitable does NOT mean equal. It means fair. It means that in a short marriage with no kids and one high earner, it’s not going to be 50-50 unless OP did something like quit her job to care for her DH’s alcoholism. I think she does deserve something additional due to the likely extra effort she put in to caring for him & the household due to his alcoholism. But not 50%.

[Anonymous]

Sorry if I missed this, OP, but what was your husband's savings before you got married? And do you and your husband really only have about $200k saved up when your husband makes $400k a year and you have no kids? That seems really low to me—and it suggests that your husband may not have been that careful with his money, which can go into the fairness evaluation.

I think you're underselling yourself. You're talking about wanting 10%-30%, and IMO that's way too low if you're talking about the money earned during the marriage. You should start with the idea that you're entitled to your half of the marital assets, then maybe add on a bit more for your husband being a dangerous drunk who crashes cars and, it sounds like, pisses away money. How much of your combined income is gone now because your husband wasted it? Is it "fair" that you take less because he wasted a lot of the money he earned? Besides, you don't want to start out with too generous of a negotiating position, because it's only going to get worse from you from there.