Plaintiff vs. Defense in Divorce

[Anonymous]

Does it matter? Is it better to be the plaintiff?

[Anonymous]

Not really. In most states you have to be separated for some time before filing so you and your ex prob both have lawyers and prob hashed out most of the important issues in a separation agreement. I suppose you are marginally better off if your ex doesnt already have a lawyer and you ambush them with papers because they have to rush to get a lawyer and file a response whereas you got to file at your leisure.

[Anonymous]

It mattered in my case. My lawyer wanted to be the plaintiff, and wanted our facts in front of the judge(s) first. I won the race to the courthouse because my lawyer was at the courthouse ready to file the morning after I moved out.

[Anonymous]

I made sure that my daughter was the plaintiff. If he was going to be that much of a horrible person who literally left her reeling and shellshocked, with no explanation, because he had a crush on someone (who later told him he was way off, BTW) then he was going to be the defendant. Damn straight.

[Anonymous]

It only matters if there’s a jurisdictional dispute (e.g. he could file in Teexas but you could file in more favorable Virginia).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I made sure that my daughter was the plaintiff. If he was going to be that much of a horrible person who literally left her reeling and shellshocked, with no explanation, because he had a crush on someone (who later told him he was way off, BTW) then he was going to be the defendant. Damn straight.

But you realize the judge probably couldn't care less.

[Anonymous]

We have dear friends who amicably separated and hashed out the custody and financial details without a lawyer. They did crowd-source ideas from divorced loved ones. But it all went south when they realized someone had to be the defendant. Two years latter, they have lawyers and are still not speaking to each other.

Judges might not care, but obviously the word triggers some people. Perhaps we could use petitioner in no fault cases?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have dear friends who amicably separated and hashed out the custody and financial details without a lawyer. They did crowd-source ideas from divorced loved ones. But it all went south when they realized someone had to be the defendant. Two years latter, they have lawyers and are still not speaking to each other.

Judges might not care, but obviously the word triggers some people. Perhaps we could use petitioner in no fault cases?

How stupid. They should flip a coin. They could always plead a sentence that the party designations are pro forma.

[Anonymous]

I actually needed to be the plaintiff because one of my work clearance questions is whether I've ever been a defendant to a civil or criminal case. It's not a brightline fireable thing but I would have to disclose it

[Anonymous]

Plaintiff gets advantages in pre-trial and trial procedures. For example I as plaintiff got to go second in questioning/deposition. This gave me time to feel more prepared. Ex messed it up and had he watched me go first, he probably would've copied a lot of what I did.

And you don't get served with divorce papers.

You pay a little more to file your disclosure as you will cover all of the joint items and accounts. (More paper = more time).

Definitely want to be plaintiff. It's the power position, however subtle it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I made sure that my daughter was the plaintiff. If he was going to be that much of a horrible person who literally left her reeling and shellshocked, with no explanation, because he had a crush on someone (who later told him he was way off, BTW) then he was going to be the defendant. Damn straight.

But you realize the judge probably couldn't care less.

Not about the judge, Einstein. It's about :
1. Public records
2. Future employment
3. Future relationships
4. Letting the world know who was the asshole.

Ex husband asked for the record to be unpublished. My daughter said "Nope."

It matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I made sure that my daughter was the plaintiff. If he was going to be that much of a horrible person who literally left her reeling and shellshocked, with no explanation, because he had a crush on someone (who later told him he was way off, BTW) then he was going to be the defendant. Damn straight.

But you realize the judge probably couldn't care less.

Not about the judge, Einstein. It's about :
1. Public records
2. Future employment
3. Future relationships
4. Letting the world know who was the asshole.

Ex husband asked for the record to be unpublished. My daughter said "Nope."

It matters.

You know, I never really believed the old axiom that daughters marry someone like their fathers - until now.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, because the person who files first is an “asshole.” I filed first against my abusive spouse. Doesn’t make me the “asshole.”

[Anonymous]

Woman here. I was the plaintiff. That felt good.

[Anonymous]

In my case, no it didn't matter.