At fault divorce..

[Anonymous]

Anyone here know if you can have an at fault divorce and do it uncontested? I think we’d both rather split money as opposed to pay a lawyer. Thanks (and I really hope it doesn’t come to this.

[Anonymous]

The whole premise of an at-fault divorce is that it’s contested. What would be the point otherwise if you agree on the terms? I’m not understanding.

[Anonymous]

Op here...gets rid of the year time limit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here...gets rid of the year time limit.

You would have to prove the fault in court and without a lawyer that’s going to be nearly impossible.

[Anonymous]

Just get a separation agreement and start the process. A year is not that long.

At fault divorce is expensive. You will be spending money on lawyers. And you have to prove fault. It is more expensive emotionally and financially to try to do it.

If you want to be fair, go to a mediator who is also an attorney, both get attorneys to review a separation agreement and file when the year is up. It is the best way. And you won't waste money on fighting with lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Op again....proving the fault is not the issue...I just want it done, without spending on lawyers or waiting a year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op again....proving the fault is not the issue...I just want it done, without spending on lawyers or waiting a year

Proving the fault is actually your entire issue. To a layperson it might not seem like a big deal or you think you have some obvious proof but the legal standard is much different than you think. It won’t speed up the process, either, because you won’t be able to represent yourself effectively or efficiently.

Get a separation agreement signed and live your separate lives for the next year. There’s no magical unicorn solution other than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op again....proving the fault is not the issue...I just want it done, without spending on lawyers or waiting a year

How is proving fault not the issue? You have a person willing to testify on the witness stand to prove fault that saw behavior with their own eyes? Do you realize that at fault divorces can take longer than a year?
Seriously, just start a separation. You are wasting time. There is no guarantee an at-fault divorce will take less than a year. That is why people usually base any divorce on separation: 1) its cheaper and 2) it is guaranteed not to drag on longer than a year.
In theory, at fault divorces are immediate but not necessarily in practice. Don't drag your spouse through the mud and air your dirty laundry. If you have kids, that is bad for coparenting.
Just start the separation. Do it tomorrow. Then your clock is ticking.

[Anonymous]

Op here...I understand the burden of proof. In this case I have no issue. The question is whether if my spouse agrees, can we do that to get around timelines. I don’t see why not...someone help me on this please

[Anonymous]

Op again follow up..division of assetts etc will be fair, hence everyone agreeing...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here...I understand the burden of proof. In this case I have no issue. The question is whether if my spouse agrees, can we do that to get around timelines. I don’t see why not...someone help me on this please

Go for it! Be sure to let us know how it works out for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here...I understand the burden of proof. In this case I have no issue. The question is whether if my spouse agrees, can we do that to get around timelines. I don’t see why not...someone help me on this please

Why would your spouse agree to a fault divorce?!! It would just make them look bad, and again, it will still take a long time.

If you agree, it is uncontested = costs less.

If you want to fight and spend money, it is contested = costs money.

By the way, I am not sure which fault you are referring but you would need evidence beyond your spouse. That does not count. I am not sure what evidence you think you have. It is hard to prove fault, so you need an attorney.

You need to decide if you want to waste your money. If not, get an uncontested divorce and start the process tomorrow. It will be much easier, cheaper, and could be faster than a fault divorce.

Everyone who wants a divorce wishes it was done immediately. Just start the process. I don't see the big deal.

[Anonymous]

A fault-based divorce typically requires a trial because you have to prove the fault-based grounds to the satisfaction of the court - your spouse not contesting it won’t be enough. This means the court will allow a period for discovery, pre-trial motions, etc. Depending on the court’s docket, this can take longer than a no-fault divorce.

[Anonymous]

You file the complaint at fault. The spouse answers and admits the fault. A court can’t require a trial on an uncontested issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You file the complaint at fault. The spouse answers and admits the fault. A court can’t require a trial on an uncontested issue.

Fault-based divorce law isn’t highly state specific. But you are wrong in that many states will still require affirmative proof of fault in cases like you described specifically because of the potential for spouses to collude to evade divorce laws.