Articles Posted in Divorce

As divorces and custody claims have become more complicated and contentious in recent years, sometimes the laws of multiple states must be addressed in evaluating the parties’ claims. Generally, the law of the state where an action is properly filed will determine how a judge addresses each party’s claims. Sometimes, when a proceeding is ongoing, one state court may be required to apply the laws of another state in evaluating a claim. The Rhode Island Supreme Court recently accepted a lower court’s application of Connecticut law when determining the propriety of an attorneys’ fees award issued during a divorce claim.

The parties in the recently decided case had been married for over 10 years when their relationship became unsustainable, and they separated. Although the parties’ primary residence was in Rhode Island, the wife took the children to Connecticut to live with family upon separation and had them enrolled in school there. In response to the move, the husband requested an emergency custody hearing in Connecticut. During that hearing, the pirates managed to reach a settlement agreement (known as a postnuptial agreement, or PNA), to effectuate their divorce, child custody, and financial matters. Part of the settlement agreement included a provision that requires anyone who unsuccessfully challenged the agreement to pay the other party’s attorney fees.

After the parties’ disputes worsened, the husband brought an action for divorce in Rhode Island court, where he had been living at the time. The husband challenged the enforcement of the postnuptial agreement. The husband’s challenge of the agreement failed, and the Rhode Island court applied the terms of the PNA, ordering him to pay his ex’s reasonable attorneys’ fees for his unsuccessful challenge of the PNA.

The Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct, which govern the practice of law in the state, set standards defining when it is inappropriate for an attorney to represent a client based on conflicts of interests. Generally, an attorney cannot represent a client in an action against a former client of theirs if the issues addressed are substantially similar to those of the previous case. The application of these rules can be difficult in divorce cases, as one party often tries to retain an attorney who may have represented the couple in other matters during the marriage. The Providence division of the Rhode Island Superior Court recently addressed a motion to disqualify one party’s attorneys in a divorce and subsequent cases based on alleged conflicts of interests.

According to the facts discussed in the judicial ruling, the parties to the present case were married in 2006 and began discussing divorce in 2017. The husband retained an attorney to represent him in the divorce proceeding. The parties attempted to negotiate a settlement through the husband’s attorney, but it ultimately fell through and the husband filed for divorce in 2020. The plaintiff attempted to have the husband’s attorney disqualified from the case, as she claimed that he represented her at earlier stages of the negotiation, and there was a conflict of interests in the attorney’s representation of the husband. The plaintiff’s attempts to have the defendant’s attorney disqualified and disciplined for representing the husband in the divorce ultimately failed, and the divorce was finalized in January 2022.

In March 2022, the plaintiff filed a separate case against her ex-husband. This case alleged that the husband assaulted her during the marriage, and she sought financial damages from him as compensation for his alleged conduct. The husband retained his same divorce attorney to represent him in this claim. The plaintiff then filed a motion to disqualify the husband’s attorney, arguing that there was a conflict of interest based on their previous interactions. The Superior court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments, finding that the defendant’s attorney never represented the plaintiff in any issue that was substantially related to her claims against her ex-husband. The plaintiff’s motion was denied. As a result of this ruling, the defendant’s attorney will be permitted to represent him in the assault case.

For many people seeking a divorce, the most desired result is simply the end of a marriage, and not much else needs to be determined. Most divorces in Rhode Island are not this simple. As part of the dissolution of a marriage, Rhode Island Law provides courts the authority to enter orders involving the couple’s children, spousal support, as well as for the division of property obtained during the marriage and other issues.

For many couples who share children and are seeking a divorce, the most important issue to be decided by the court is that of the custody and care of the children. Rhode Island courts primarily consider a custody arrangement that is in the “best interests” of the children. Although one parent may be awarded primary physical custody of the children, state law protects the noncustodial parent’s rights to visitation with the child, unless good cause can be shown for restricting such vitiation. Courts can also award joint physical and legal custody of children to both parents, who would then share in the day-to-day care and decision-making for the child. When fighting for custody or visitation rights, a parent needs to be adequately prepared and have an understanding of the factors used by the courts in awarding custody.

In addition to the custody of children, Rhode Island courts may also enter orders awarding child support and spousal support (alimony) to either party. Generally, the party with primary physical custody of the children will receive a support award from the noncustodial parent. Child support is based largely on the parties’ incomes. It is common for divorcing parents to try and conceal or misrepresent some of their income or expenses to manipulate a court into awarding an unfair support or alimony award, so it is important that a detailed and accurate accounting be performed on the couple’s finances before an award is issued.

When a Rhode Island couple chooses to go through a divorce, one of the largest issues for the court to determine is the division of marital property between the parties. Bank accounts, retirement accounts, and financial instruments can usually be divided relatively easily, as their fair value can be readily determined. Real estate, personal property, and business interests are also generally divided equitably, with accepted values used to offset each party’s share of the estate.

The division of business interests and real estate between parties to a divorce can become more complicated, as the appropriate values can be difficult to reasonably ascertain. Although determining the value of such property can be difficult, the law requires an equitable division of such property. The Rhode Island Supreme Court recently ruled against a former husband who attempted to transfer shared marital real estate to an LLC in his exclusive possession in anticipation of a divorce.

According to the facts discussed in the appellate opinion, the plaintiff in the recently decided case is a woman who has been in the process of divorce from the defendant for several years. During the divorce proceedings, the defendant chose to convey a parcel of real estate that was owned by both parties to an LLC company he created in his name alone. On the plaintiff’s motion, the family court forced the defendant’s company to become a party to the divorce, and also ordered the sale of the property from the couple to the defendant’s LLC to be set aside, so that the value of the property could be equitably divided between the parties.

Couples considering divorce in Rhode Island have most likely heard horror stories from other divorced couples who complain about complicated and expensive divorce lawsuits that went on for years, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars, or more. As a divorce case becomes more contested and the parties dig in their heels on specific issues, that the strain on a couple’s finances, relationships with their children, and personal psychological well being can exacerbate an already difficult situation. If both parties understand these risks going into a separation or divorce, the worst of the problems can be avoided by agreeing to seek a Rhode Island collaborative divorce.

Collaborative divorce and mediation offer an alternative to the “ugly divorce” that often leaves parties bitter and full of regret. A collaborative divorce seeks to avoid the pitfalls of litigation while still protecting each party’s rights and resulting in an agreement that is fair and more likely to be followed by the parties, while also being legally binding and enforceable. Parties who agree to a collaborative divorce or a mediated settlement agreement can both have attorneys at their side, who will advise and assist them in discussing disputed issues to reach a full agreement without the need for a trial.

Contested divorces are often approached in a way that exacerbates the disagreements between the parties from the start of the process, and as issues become more complicated, attorney’s fees and time delays only increase. It’s possible to resolve all of the issues that may come up in a divorce in a mediated session that occurs outside of the courtroom. Couples who wish to obtain a divorce more simply and quickly can resolve financial asset division, child custody, parent time and visitation, the assumption of debts, child support and spousal support, as well as other issues with the help of their attorneys and one or more neutral mediators who are specially trained to resolve disputes and achieve fair and realistic settlements.

Factual determinations that are made by family courts in Rhode Island divorce proceedings may be the subject of much dispute and differing interpretations, but appellate courts usually grant lower courts great deference by accepting a family court’s factual findings unless there is overwhelming evidence of a mistake. The Rhode Island Supreme Court recently decided an appeal from a judgment by the Newport County Family Court in a divorce case determining the division of marital assets and child support.

The appellant in the recently decided case was the husband in a divorce that was finalized in September of 2016. The disputed issues in the divorce included the custody of the couples’ child, the division of certain retirement and bank accounts, child support, the propriety of withdrawals made by each of the parties during the divorce proceeding, as well as the application of the parties’ 2007 premarital agreement to these asset division questions.

The most significant claim in the appeal was the husband’s claim to an equal share of $373,400 in gains to the wife’s 401(k) account that accrued during the marriage. The parties’ premarital agreement stated that the husband was entitled to half of the total contributions to the account during the marital period, which the trial court found to be approximately $79,500. The husband claimed that he was entitled to the actual contributions, as well as the interest earned on the account during the marital period, which would total $156,700. On appeal, the Rhode Island Supreme Court accepted the family court’s interpretation of the premarital agreement language and didn’t disturb the ruling.