Reply to What is fair in this divorce?

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "What is fair in this divorce?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=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[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

*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%. [/quote]

You keep harping on that but you’re effectively wrong. For starters, you would have to get it in front of a judge which means costly litigation and still might have the same outcome. While we may not be community property states, we are de facto 50/50 states. And no judge is going to give two shots what she “put in to him.” For four measly years. Hell, they might decide she drove him to drink.[/quote]

What am I wrong about? I think you fundamentally misunderstand how mediation works. You go into a mediation with (hopefully) an idea of an offer that bears some relation to what a court would actually do. You don’t subtract litigation costs from your mediation offer either because they have not been incurred. In this case the background law *does not specify 50-50.* That is not how it works in an equitable state. So there is zero basis for OP to go into a mediation based on a belief she is entitled to 50% under the law, without regard for the factual circumstances actually considered by a judge in an equitable division state. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics