Maryland Judge Awards Couple Joint Legal Custody of Lucky the Dog

Posted on July 10, 2010 by Jason Brown

Michelle Lore, a contributing author to the Minnesota Lawyer Blog recently authored a post about the custody decision in Maryland involving...a dog. She reports:

A judge in Maryland recently decided a custody battle with a twist — it was over a beloved pet.

A childless couple heading for a divorce could not agree on who would have the right to keep Lucky, their 16-pound Lhasa apso.

Maryland treats pets as jointly owned marital property that must be sold if the divorcing couple can’t agree on who gets to keep them. The parties split the proceeds of the sale.

But retired Prince George’s County Circuit Judge Graydon S. McKee III, a dog owner himself, didn’t like that solution so he fashioned his own. After hearing testimony from both parties — Gayle, who lives in Alexandria, Va., and Craig, who resides in Dunkirk, Md. — McKee decided that the couple would split custody. Lucky will alternate homes every six months.

Comments seem to make great reading. No exception here. Law Lacky said, "That is nothing. I worked on a divorce case a decade ago that involved ferrets. The divorce decree included weekly visitations and “ferret support."

In Minnesota, pets are viewed as property, with no clear answer on how to "divide" them.

Minnesota attorney Barbara Gislason, a nationally recognized animal rights lawyer has this to say about pets and custody:

It is an interesting phenomenon that they seem almost invisible in Family Law. Because about 2/3 of households have pets and spend in excess of 40 billion per year on them, and a majority of owners consider animals to be family members, should this continue?

Barbara's position seems to make sense. I can't imagine it would take the legislature more than a few minutes to adopt a quick set of standards for the court to consider, including who has been the primarily caretaker of the animal.

Tags: , , , , ,

When and How Can a Spousal Maintenance Award be Modified?

Posted on July 10, 2010 by Jason Brown

Once an award of spousal maintenance (alimony) is ordered by the court, it may be modified if certain criteria are met. In order to modify and award of alimony, the party seeking modification obtains a court date and serves and files motion papers. Keep in mind that the modification, if granted, is usually only retroactive to the date that the motion papers are served on the other side. For that reason, it is important to obtain legal assistance at the earliest possible time, rather than allowing arrears to build up, if you are unable to afford the maintenance obligation as ordered.

Any of the following provide a basis for the judge to modify an existing alimony order:

  • Substantially increased or decreased earnings of either party;
  • Substantially increased or decreased needs of either party;
  • Receipt of public assistance benefits;
  • Change in cost of living, as measured by the federal government; and
  • Significant medical expenses incurred on behalf of a child that are not otherwise addressed in the judgment and decree.

Additional factors for consideration include the initial standards the court addresses in awarding spousal maintenance:

  • Financial need of each party relative to their income;
  • The ability of one party to pay the other spousal support;
  • The length of marriage;
  • The mental and physical health of the parties;
  • The role each party played during the marriage, in terms of working or raising children;
  • Financial assets available to each party to supplement their income;
  • The educational background of each party; and
  • The age of each party.

While the issues involved in modifying spousal maintenance are usually addressed in motion papers alone (such as affidavits and exhibits), some judges will order an evidentiary hearing (trial) to determine whether the request for modification is appropriate.

Tags: ,