Blog

Custody Modification

May 16th, 2013

Custody Modification

My ex-husband and I divorced two years ago and he was awarded custody of our three children.  Is there anything I can do to change the custody award?

Either party may ask the court to modify any portion of the judgment that provides for the custody, parenting time, visitation, support and welfare of the minor children. ORS 107.135(1)(a).  The party seeking the modification, however, must show there has been an unanticipated substantial change of circumstances since the original, or most recent, custody award; otherwise, the party seeking modification will not be entitled to any relief.  Only after the court finds there has been an unanticipated substantial change of circumstances since the original, or most recent, custody award, will the court consider whether it is in the child’s best interests to modify custody.

In Co v. Storm, 236 Or.App. 578, 238 P.3d 30 (Or. App., 2010), the Oregon Court of Appeals established the following standard for modifying child custody:

A party seeking a change of custody must show, first, that “circumstances relevant to the capacity of either the moving party or the legal custodian to take care of the child properly have changed” since the entry of the last custody order and, second, that, “considering the asserted change of circumstances in the context of all relevant evidence, it would be in the child’s best interests to change custody.” Boldt and Boldt, 344 Or. 1, 9, 176 P.3d 388, cert. den., 129 S.Ct. 47, 172 L.Ed.2d 23 (2008). Id.  at 592.

In addition to being substantial, the change in circumstances must be unanticipated. Dillard and Dillard, 179 Or.App. 24, 30-31, 39 P.3d 230 (2002).

In Dewolfe v. Miller, 145 P.3d 338, 347-348, 208 Or. App. 726 (Or. App., 2006), the court held:

The long-established rule is that a party seeking modification of custody must “show a change of circumstances arising subsequent to the making of the last order respecting custody” and that changing custody would benefit the child. Henrickson v. Henrickson, 225 Or. 398, 402, 403, 358 P.2d 507 (1961). The “change of circumstances” requirement is satisfied “[i]f circumstances relating to the capability of one or both parents to care for their child have changed since the previous custody arrangement[.]” State ex rel Johnson v. Bail, 325 Or. 392, 394, 938 P.2d 209 (1997). The court considers the best interests of the child only if a change of circumstances is established. Id. at 397, 938 P.2d 209.

The change in circumstances rule is meant to avoid repeated litigation and promote stability for the child. Id. at 398, 938 P.2d 209; Ortiz and Ortiz, 310 Or. 644, 649, 801 P.2d 767 (1990). Unless the parent seeking a custody modification “establishes that the facts that formed the basis for the prior custody determination have changed materially by the time of the modification hearing, the prior adjudication is preclusive with respect to the issue of the best interests of the child under the extant facts.” Johnson, 325 Or. at 398, 938 P.2d 209. That preclusive effect means that a parent seeking a change in custody cannot rely, to establish a change in circumstances, on evidence that was or could have been introduced in the earlier custody proceeding. For example, a mother “could not obtain a change in custody solely upon the basis of evidence of the father’s conduct as shown in the transcript of the original proceeding or additional evidence which could have been introduced in the first proceeding but was not. In either instance, the decision in the prior proceeding would be res judicata in a subsequent modification proceeding, assuming that there was no evidence of a change in circumstances after the original decree.”  Greisamer and Greisamer, 276 Or. 397, 401-02, 555 P.2d 28 (1976) (italics added); see also Henrickson, 225 Or. at 402, 358 P.2d 507 (“The net effect of our earlier decisions is to render every prior custody order res judicata in any later modification matter.” (Italics added.)).

Under such res judicata principles, a purportedly changed circumstance cannot be a circumstance that the court contemplated at the time of the earlier determination. See Padbury and Padbury, 46 Or.App. 533, 536, 612 P.2d 321 (1980) (stating that change in circumstances “must be a change which was not contemplated at the time of the original decree” and the child’s increased age was not such a change); Wyatt and Wyatt, 36 Or. App. 563, 566 n. 1, 585 P.2d 31, rev. den., 284 Or. 521 (1978) (noting that the mother’s graduation from school and new employment “would not be a sufficient change of circumstances standing alone as it would have been reasonably contemplated at the time the decree was entered”). That rule also applies when a parent fails to raise a known circumstance in an earlier custody proceeding. In Southworth and Southworth, 113 Or.App. 607, 835 P.2d 122, rev. den., 314 Or. 574, 840 P.2d 1296 (1992), we did not consider the mother’s nudist lifestyle to be a change in circumstances. Although the court was unaware of that lifestyle at the time of the initial judgment, the father and his attorney knew and failed to raise the matter before the judgment was signed and entered. We explained, “If father thought that the evidence was relevant to mother’s capacity to care for their child, he should have brought it to the court’s attention, instead of reserving it for use in relitigating the issue of custody.” Id. at 614, 835 P.2d 122.”  Id. at 347-348.

Accordingly, so long as there has been an unanticipated substantial change of circumstances since the award of custody to your ex-husband, you can bring a motion to modify custody. In order to prevail on your motion, you will need to prove it is in your children’s best interests that you be awarded custody instead.

If you need a divorce attorney, please contact the Law Office of Bret D. Lubic, 503-232-3940 or click here today. My office is located at 1507 SE 45th Avenue, Ste. 308, Portland, OR 97215.

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Bookmark and Share

What Can I Do If I Discovered a Mistake in My Oregon Divorce Judgment?

April 26th, 2013

Happy couple seal a deal with their personal financial advisor at home

What Can I Do If I Discovered a Mistake in My Oregon Divorce Judgment?

If the mistake occurred because of an oversight or an omission, you can ask the court to correct the error.  ORCP 71A. These mistakes normally occur during the drafting of the divorce judgment and are clear to everyone involved including the lawyers.  In my 20 years of practice as a divorce attorney, I have never had a dispute with another attorney over a clerical mistake. That’s because as humans we recognize these mistakes sometimes happen, which is why we have a rule that allows such mistakes to be easily fixed.

Other mistakes may occur, however, where the only remedy is to vacate or set aside the divorce judgment.  In other words, in some situations you can tear up your divorce judgment and begin again. These types of mistakes need to be brought to the attention of the court as soon as they are discovered, and not more than one year after the divorce judgment is entered. ORCP 71B(1)(a).

I recently had a case where the father mistakenly reported his net income instead of his gross income on a divorce form.  As a result of the mistake, the father’s child support obligation for three children was less than it should have been.  The mother, meanwhile, was a housewife during the marriage without any prospect of employment.  Neither the mother nor the father sought the advice of an attorney before signing the divorce judgment, and the mother agreed the father did not have to pay her spousal support (alimony).

Both the husband and wife testified in court they were unaware of the mistake.  As a result, much to the father’s chagrin, the court set aside the judgment.  Consequently, the mother now has a second chance to ask for what she is entitled to, namely, an appropriate amount of child support and spousal support.

The lesson that can be learned from this case is that you should never sign a divorce judgment without the advice of an attorney.  You don’t necessarily need to be represented by an attorney, but you should have an attorney review your divorce judgment before you sign it because mistakes can occasionally occur.  Luckily for my client, she came to see me within one year of her divorce, and we were able to obtain the relief she needed.

If you need a divorce attorney, please contact the Law Office of Bret D. Lubic, 503-232-3940 or click here today. My office is located at 1507 SE 45th Avenue, Ste. 308, Portland, OR 97215.

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Bookmark and Share

Should I Get a Divorce?

April 15th, 2013

Middleaged happy couple

Another way to ask this question is:  Can people change? Can my spouse change? Can I change? If you adopt the principles of Determinism, the theory that our character has been determined by our genetic history, family and upbringing, then the answer is no.  If you adopt the principles of Free Will, the theory that regardless of the choices we have made thus far, we get to make choices in the future that can change our character, or more importantly, how our character is perceived, then the answer is yes.

Of course, in a relationship, it takes two people, not one, to effectuate real change. Both partners must be willing to look forward, not back, in order to give change a fair chance.  If either partner thinks change is impossible, then no amount of couples counseling or individual counseling will fix the problem.

Socrates said, according to Plato, ask a lot of questions.  Aristotle said, before you start asking questions, ask if there is an expert in the field, and if there is an expert, defer to the expert; however, if there are no experts, either everyone gets to be an expert or no one gets to be an expert.

One of the things we know in the 21st century that was not known by our ancient philosophers is how our hormones and brain chemicals affect the way we think.  Sometimes we make poor decisions when our hormones are off balance, or when we are impaired by alcohol or drugs.  Sometimes our behavioral patterns induce poor decision-making.  Ultimately, the question is:  Can we train the brain? Some experts say yes, others say no.  There is no universal opinion regarding this matter.  My opinion as a Portland, Oregon divorce attorney with 20 years experience is that it depends on a person’s attitude.

Psychotherapists, among other social scientists, are trained to diagnose their patients based on objective categorical criteria, yet we are all individuals who experience life subjectively.  While we do have commonalities, we are all unique. Nevertheless, we each have the capacity to adapt to our ever changing social environment.  Look at how the cell phone has changed our culture over the last ten years. Moreover, we have the capacity to effectuate social change as a society, as evidenced by the enactment of civil rights laws over the last 100 years.  If we have the power to change the way we behave and think as a society, then we have power to change the way we behave and think as individuals.  In other words, we know people can change.  We have seen people change.  It begins with an open mind.

Back to the original question:  Should you get a divorce?  The answer lies in your and your partner’s willingness and ability to make changes in the relationship, and in yourselves.

If you need a divorce attorney, please contact the Law Office of Bret D. Lubic, 503-232-3940 or click here today. My office is located at 1507 SE 45th Avenue, Ste. 308, Portland, OR 97215.

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Bookmark and Share

Collaborative Divorce – A New Way of Thinking

April 11th, 2013

Collaborative Divorce

Divorce can be costly.  Not just financially, but emotionally.  You don’t need to be a divorce attorney to understand the devastating consequences a divorce may have on an entire family.

When there is contentious litigation over custody, parenting time, child support and / or spousal support, and both parties are represented by attorneys charging $250 or more per hour, a divorce can easily cost a parent in attorney’s fees alone the tuition for an undergraduate degree at the University of Oregon.

The emotional price of a litigious divorce is a completely different matter. When parties end up battling in court over issues regarding their children, they almost never leave the court room as friends.

One of the reasons why divorces end up in the courtroom is due to our adversarial legal system.  Think about that for just a minute.  Adversity induces conflict.  It does not inhibit it.  Ultimately, it takes cooperation, not adversity, for parties to reach a settlement agreement. The simple act of engaging in a settlement dialogue requires some level of cooperation. If one spouse insists on having an issue decided by a judge, then the other spouse must engage in the court battle if he or she does not want to lose by default.

One option available for parties to settle their differences out of court is through mediation, where a neutral third person assists the parties in reaching a settlement, if one can be reached.  Another option the parties may consider for the purpose of reaching a settlement is through collaborative divorce.

A collaborative divorce is non-adversarial. Through the collaborative process, the parties and their attorneys agree to work jointly with each other, not against each other, to resolve any issues in dispute. This process encourages cooperation among everyone involved, particularly the professionals.  Through cooperation, the parties have a much better chance of reaching a settlement than through adversity.

Every action we take has the potential to create positive or negative feelings within us. In my twenty years of practicing law, I have never had a client who wasn’t nervous about going to court. More often than not the outcome is uncertain. Ultimately, a trial is a competition which neither side wants to lose. I have often advised clients they have more control over the outcome of a case through settlement and compromise than through a court contest.  Not surprisingly, parties faced with a divorce are much more satisfied with the collaborative process than the traditional process. Not only because it is less expensive, but also because it gives them empowerment over the outcome.

If you are interested in learning more about collaborative divorce, please contact the Law Office of Bret D. Lubic, 503-232-3940 or click here today. My office is located at 1507 SE 45th Avenue, Ste. 308, Portland, OR 97215.

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Bookmark and Share

Divorce Court Division of Assets: Equitable not Equal

January 16th, 2013

During our marriage, my spouse and I shared everything.  Why am I being asked to accept less than half of the marital assets?

Division of assets at the end of a marriage is based on a court’s determination of the “just and proper” division of property in light of all the circumstances of the parties. These circumstances include the following:

Timing.  Property acquired before marriage or given as a gift to only one party is not subject to the presumption of equal contribution.  A recent change to Oregon law states, “Property acquired by gift to one party during the marriage and separately held by that party on a continuing basis from the time of receipt is not subject to a presumption of equal contribution . . ..”  (ORS 107.105(1)(f)(d))

Relative Contribution. For property acquired during the marriage, there is a presumption of equal contribution.  This can be rebutted, but it applies to property either jointly or separately held.

Relative Benefit.  Debt acquired during marriage is also subject to property division during dissolution.  Courts must divide this debt equitably. (McInnis and McInnis, 62 Or.App. 524, 527, 661 P.2d 942 (1983)).  For debt acquired during marriage, courts look at who benefited from that debt in order to determine whether it primarily benefited one or both parties.  This means that courts may not only consider who took out a loan or signed a note, but how the money was used.  In some cases, this leads to a determination that one party or the other was the primary beneficiary.

Oregon courts take into account whether there was co-mingling of assets and debt during the marriage or whether business and financial interests were kept separate.  In a recent opinion, the Oregon Court of Appeals found that a woman had rebutted the presumption of equal contribution by meticulously keeping “business enterprises separate from the marital estate, . . . contributions by Husband were done in the context of a business relationship for which Husband was compensated . . . .”   Further, the court held,

Our cases recognize a distinction between marital debts and debts that benefited only one of the parties. In determining the nature of a debt, courts “focus not on the person in whose name the [debt was incurred], but on the use to which it was put.” Christensen and Christensen  ____ Or. App. _____ , slip op. at 6 (December 5, 2012) (quoting Branscomb and Branscomb, 201 Or App 188, 202, 117 P3d 1051, rev den, 339 Or 544 (2005)).

So it is important to keep your business affairs separate if you wish to protect them from a marital property division.  Also, interestingly, if debts have been incurred during marriage, and there is a possibility they will be forgiven, courts have addressed this by setting up contingent asset and debt divisions allowing for future payment on debt but only if that debt is paid. (See In Re Marriage of Shlitter, 71 P.3d 154, at 158 188 Or. App. 277 (Or. App., 2003); citing Ashlock, 186 Or.App. at 219 n. 2, 62 P.3d 8

Bookmark and Share

Animal Custody Law And Divorce

December 28th, 2012

Parrot Parentage or Pups as Property?

“Squawk!  Polly needs a parrot clause in the prenup, PDQ!”

How many times have family law attorneys heard this plea in Portland?  Probably, plenty on which to predicate this post!

The interests of non-human animals have long been protected in criminal cases of abuse and neglect, but the area of animal law has expanded over the past decade and best interests arguments are increasingly being considered by courts in civil matters.  The apparent best interests of animals are now protected regularly in proceedings before civil courts and specifically cited in formal rulings.

Though animals are considered by the courts to be property, they are now inheriting property and being accommodated, along with children, in determinations likened to those of custody determinations.  Property rights are not the only factors cited by courts in  awarding animals as property.  A Virgina court found that a cat’s happiness “took priority” over property rights in a dispute between two former roommates and found that it was in the “best interest” of the cat to be awarded to the roommate who did not have a strict property interest. Zovko v. Gregory, No. CH 97-544 (Arlington County (Va.) Circuit Court, Oct. 17, 1997) (see also Raymond v. Lachman, 695 N.Y.S. 2d 308(N.Y. App. Div. 1999) citing the emotional life of the cat as a factor)

Agreements establishing ownership are honored and upheld by courts once these agreements are crafted by parties.

Since proving what is in the best interest of an animal without the ability to speak (notwithstanding parrot parlance) may well be impossible, pets are usually treated as property under the law.  However, the pet’s purchase price may not be the only fact considered.  According to the Animal Legal Defense Fund, in a “custody battle” courts may consider which party ensures the animal’s basic daily needs such as food, shelter, exercise, grooming, and flea control are met; who takes the animal to the veterinarian; who maintains appropriate supervision and who sees that state and local regulations are followed.  Finally, a court may consider who has the greatest ability to financially support the animal.

It is possible to build a case for guardianship of an animal in the event no agreement can be made  through negotiation.  It may, however, make good sense to consider making an agreement with your human partner before marriage or cohabitation to avoid undue surprise or disappointment on parting ways.

The December issue of the Oregon State Bar Family Law Newsletter provides a helpful list of decisions, from courts across the country, wherein the fate of family pets was decided.  In these cases, the courts discuss non-property concepts using rhetoric as a heuristic strategy instead of earnestly delving into the very possibly unanswerable questions such as, “are animals thoughtful?” or “what is emotion?”   Good for the courts!  Litigants appreciate the attention paid to their pet’s feelings, but also that economy of argument generally paves a less painful path to final decision.

The OSB’s list includes Akers v. Sellers:  In 1944, the Indiana Appellate court ascribed human-like emotion to a dog in discussing how to handle husband’s suit for recovery of property.  That court asked, whether the “interests and desires” of the dog should factor into a determination of ownership and questioned, in its decision, whether the dog’s “love, affection and loyalty” were for the husband or the wife.  Admitting it could give no real weight to these considerations, the court held the dog to have been a gift conferred on wife by husband during the marriage. 54 N.E.2d 779 (Ind.App.1944)

The list also includes cases comparing pets not only to inanimate property, but also to plant life.  The Iowa court of appeals ruled “a dog is personal property” and did not disturb the lower court’s property division.  Though wife testified the dog had been a gift, her appeal was unsuccessful because the court found no error in the trial court’s division considered as a whole.  The appeals court upheld the trial court’s finding that the dog offset some other asset, liability, or group of assets and liabilities was without error.  When asked to order visitation with a golden retriever, a Delaware trial court found in 1995 that it would not “get into the flora or fauna visitation business.”  Though this may seem a callous treatment of the issue, with no enforceable state interest in visitation or custody rights for non human animals, pets and plants are similarly situated.

Recent family law cases give some weight to best interests arguments, but with mixed results.  Visitation decisions remain problematic thanks to the lack of enforcement infrastructure coupled with the inapplicability of the legal concepts of custody and visitation (parenting time)to non humans.  Decisions about where and under what conditions a pet will live after the caretakers can no longer live together continue to confer property and not parental rights albeit with consideration to the apparent welfare (emotional or otherwise) of both man and beast.

If you have any further questions about Animal law, please contact the attorney at law experts at Bret D. Lubic, PC to learn more. Call 503.232.3940 or click here today!

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Bookmark and Share

An Overview of Oregon DUI Legal Defense

December 4th, 2012

By: Henry D. LeSueur, Esq.

So you or a loved one was recently cited for violating Oregon’s DUI law and you looking for information about how to protect yourself, avoid a conviction, and perhaps to save your driver’s license. You’ve come to the right place. Below I explain the potential consequences of a DUI charge and how to avoid the worst of them.

Most often, the first decision you have to make in this situation is whether to request a DMV hearing to contest the suspension of your license. This request must be made within 10 days of your arrest. Whether to request this hearing depends on the circumstances giving rise to your arrest. The typical issue addressed at these hearings is whether the officer had probable cause to suspect you were driving under the influence. If the circumstances of your arrest were at all suspicious, you should immediately contact a lawyer to see if you might bring a successful case and protect your driving privileges. While the DMV determines your license status, a criminal case is likely beginning in a circuit or municipal court.

An Oregon DUI Charge can lead to a misdemeanor or felony conviction, depending mostly on the number of DUI convictions you have had in the past. The difference is that felonies result in prison sentences, significantly higher fines, and more severe consequences to your driving privileges. Either way, you’re probably wondering if you can beat the charges and escape a conviction or maybe you have decided to admit guilt and proceed with the least painful path to redemption.

At this law firm, we never sacrifice your rights before we have all the information. Every client who meets with our attorneys about a DUI charge is innocent! This is because our system affords every defendant the presumption of innocence. Just like you may have heard in movies or on TV, you remain innocent until your guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of your peers.

After we receive the charges against you, we begin the “discovery” process. During this phase, attorneys review the police and breathalyzer records, interview witnesses, gather photographs and other physical evidence, and subpoena public and private records where necessary. Police officers make mistakes just like the rest of us and if we can find any mistakes or omissions in the reports we can improve your chances of beating the charges at trial. However, not every case leads to a trial. In fact, the vast majority of cases are resolved by a plea deal brokered between your attorney and the prosecuting authority.

The most common plea deal in Oregon is the Oregon DUII Diversion Program. The Diversion Program is so popular because it allows the defendant to enter a conditional guilty plea. Prosecution of the case is put on hold while the defendant attends classes and treatment that discourage him or her from driving under the influence again. The best part is that one year after entering the Oregon DUII Diversion Program, your DUI charge can be dismissed!

Eligibility requirements for the Oregon DUII Diversion Program are proscribed by law:

  • No prior DUII or felony convictions in the past 15 years
  • No attendance in a diversion-like program in the previous 15 years
  • The driver may not possess a CDL
  • No physical injury resulted from the DUI incident

Beginning in 2012, participants in the Oregon DUII Diversion program are required to maintain an ignition interlock device in his or her car for the entire one-year period. There are few exceptions to this rule. The cost of renting an installing the device is also born by the defendant. You can also expect to take some drug and alcohol tests at the beginning of the program.

If you do not qualify for the Oregon DUII Diversion Program, there may be other ways to negotiate a fair plea deal with the Prosecutor. This depends mostly on the jurisdiction in which you are being prosecuted; however, the same sentencing minimum and maximum penalties apply statewide. For most first time convictions, the minimum penalty is 48 hours in jail and $1,000 in fines. The maximum is up to a year in jail and $6,250 in fines. The potential sentences increase if you have had multiple past encounters with law enforcement.

If negotiation with the Prosecutor fails, you are headed for trial. This is an event that many are familiar with through pop culture, especially if you are a fan of drama TV. Having a trial may provide the best chance at relieving you of the DUI charge because prosecutor has to meet a very high burden of proof. The standard requires that a judge or jury believe in your guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.  A skilled attorney will present your case in the best light, by pointing out evidence that creates reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury.

In Oregon, prosecutors can’t just “drop” a DUI charge, unless it is in the interests of justice. So you options are usually limited to those discussed above. In different jurisdictions, however, other options may be available. Multnomah County in particular has a special program for dealing with DUI offenders that do not qualify for the Oregon DUII Diversion Program. If you have questions about this program or any of the other information contained on this website, contact Henry for a free consultation. He is often available outside normal business hours.

If you have any further questions about Oregon’s DUI law, please contact the attorney at law experts at Bret D. Lubic, PC to learn more. Call 503.232.3940 or click here today!

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

 

Bookmark and Share

About Modification of Child Support

November 29th, 2012

I lost my job; you got a raise.  Is this our child’s problem?

After a child support order has been in effect for some time, parents may wish to modify it to better reflect each parent’s financial responsibility. When parents agree to the change, a child support modification can be a fairly simple process.  The Child Support Program, run by the Oregon Department of Justice, may be petitioned to review an order of support.  The state child support guidelines will still apply in the same way they did when initial determination was made, taking parenting time, income, and needs of the child or children into consideration.  According to the state website, “if it has been at least 35 months since the date the last order was entered or reviewed, or you can show proof that there has been a significant change of circumstance” you may ask for review. http://www.oregonchildsupport.gov/services/pages/modification.aspx)

However, if you and the other parent do not agree that a change in support is necessary, asking for review and modification may not lead to increased support, but instead to a hearing or ongoing litigation.  It is best to go in with the facts and be realistic in your expectations.  If the other parent does not agree to a modification, the burden is on you to show there has been a change.  “Only those standards outlined by [ORS 107.135(4)(a)] may be used to determine if there has been a substantial change in economic circumstances.” Nibler and Nibler, 184 Or App 23, 26, 55 P3d 529 (2002).  It may also be necessary to show that this change was not anticipated at the time the initial order was signed.

Significant changes which may warrant modification are a change in parenting time, a change in the child’s needs, or a substantial change in income.  It is important to be honest in assessing whether or not changes were anticipated when the original support order was signed.  Since parties to a dissolution or custody proceeding have leeway to agree to terms varying from the norm, they must reasonably anticipate income expectations and spending habits.   In Bock and Bock, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s award of modification because the downward departure in the original order of child support was predicated on an unequal division of property favoring the mother.  Because she had sold the investments on which she had expected to earn interest, her income a year after the stipulated order was entered had declined.  This decrease was not unanticipated.  249 Or App 241, 275 P3d 1006 (2012).

When negotiating and stipulating to a unique support order, which does not follow the typical formula, it is important to soberly acknowledge the reason you are willing to accept a lower award and consider the possibilities.  This way, there is less chance litigation will be a part of your future parenting plans.  If you are stipulating to a lower level of support because you will receive a greater portion of the marital property for instance, then modification of that award may be very difficult to obtain in the future even if the value of the property declines or you experience a loss of income.

If you have any further questions about Child Support, please contact the attorney at law experts at Bret D. Lubic, PC to learn more. Call 503.232.3940 or click here today!

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

 

Bookmark and Share

Oregon Family Law: Breach Of Fiduciary Duty

November 21st, 2012

 

Spouses, even those not cohabiting, owe one another a fiduciary duty of good faith and fair dealing. A fiduciary duty between spouses is a legal duty to act in the best interests of the marital union, just like a fiduciary duty between business partners is a legal duty to act in the best interests of the business.

For example, if Jack, immediately before filing for divorce, liquidates a savings account he owns jointly with his wife, Jill, without Jill’s knowledge or consent, and gives the money to his cousin, Joe, to hold for him until after the divorce is final, he has breached his fiduciary duty to Jill.  In this instance, Jill can request the court to punish Jack for his breach of fiduciary duty, and the court has the discretion to do so.

As explained by the Oregon Court of Appeals in Dunkin and Dunkin, 162 Or App 500 (1999),

A fiduciary duty exists when there is a relationship of special confidence, in which one party to the relationship is bound to act in good faith and with due regard to the interests of the other. Starkweather v. Shaffer, 262 Or 198, 205, 497 P2d 358 (1972). Oregon courts have recognized that a relationship of husband and wife is such a relationship of special confidence, requiring “a fiduciary duty of the highest degree.” Eltzroth and Eltzroth, 67 Or App 520, 525, 679 P2d 1369 (1984). That fiduciary duty continues “‘while the parties contemplate dissolution of their marriage as long as the confidential relationship remains intact, and the parties are not dealing at arms’ length through separate agents or attorneys.’” Auble and Auble, 125 Or App 554, 560, 866 P2d 1239 (1993) (quoting Eltzroth, 67 Or App at 522).

* * * * *

A marital partner who is subject to a fiduciary duty has a duty “to deal with [the other marital partner] fairly and to make a full and frank disclosure of all circumstances materially bearing on the contemplated agreement, including a full disclosure of marital assets.” Eltzroth, 67 Or App at 526.

Because the relationship between spouses is fiduciary in character, and imposes upon them an obligation of loyalty and of the utmost good faith, fairness and honesty in their dealings with each other, anyone contemplating a divorce or legal separation is advised to be honest and truthful to his or her spouse with respect to matters pertaining to the marital estate, otherwise, he or she risks being punished by the court when it comes to dividing the parties’ assets and liabilities.

If you have any further questions about Fiduciary Duty, please contact the attorney at law experts at Bret D. Lubic, PC to learn more. Call 503.232.3940 or click here today!

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Image Source: http://img.ehowcdn.com/article-new/ehow/images/a06/dm/e3/meaning-fiduciary-duty_-800×800.jpg

Bookmark and Share

About Voluntary Termination of Parental Rights

November 15th, 2012

My ex has moved away and refuses to let me see my child or even talk to her on the phone. I’ve sent cards and letters but they were returned unopened. I can barely make my house payments because so much of my pay is being withheld for child support, and as near as I can tell she spends all the money on herself and not my child. I would like to terminate my parental rights and get my life back; how do I do this?

It is unfortunate that you (and your child) are facing this situation but, as with all matters of family law, there are right ways and wrong ways of dealing with it. You can request a modification of your support obligation or enforcement of your parenting time, but unless your ex remarries and her husband adopts your child, you cannot terminate your parental rights.

You must remember that Oregon family law always puts the child’s best interests first. Under Oregon law, ”The terms of child support and parenting time (visitation) are designed for the child’s benefit and not the parents’ benefit. You must pay support even if you are not receiving visitation. You must comply with visitation orders even if you are not receiving child support.” ORS 107.106

The law also states “It is the policy of this state to assure minor children of frequent and continuing contact with parents . . . and to encourage parents to share in the rights and responsibilities of raising their children . . . .” ORS 107.149

In your case, voluntary termination of your parental rights would not benefit your child because it would simply remove one of her two parents from her life, and leave her entirely dependent on the resources of the one remaining parent. The state will simply not allow this.

However, just as you are under court order to pay child support for your child’s benefit and can be penalized for failing to do so, your ex is under court order to allow parenting time for your child’s benefit, and she can also be penalized for failing to do so.

You can ask the court to help enforce your parenting time. There is a wide range of solutions and penalties available, from ordering make-up parenting time to scheduling a hearing to change custody to you. Every county has its own policies and forms for enforcing parenting time, so you should determine which court you will be filing in and then check that court’s procedures.

If you feel your child support payments are excessive and you are in danger of losing your home, you can ask to have your obligation reconsidered. You can do this through the court, but you can also do it administratively through the Division of Child Support.

Oregon courts make every effort to be accessible to everyone and many courts have facilitators who can help you with forms and procedures, but they cannot give you legal advice. An Oregon family law attorney can help you decide which options are best for you.

Taking legal measures to enforce your parenting time rights may not be easy, but it may be the only way to make sure your child enjoys the benefit of having both parents in her life, which is truly in her best interest.

If you have any further questions about Child Support, please contact the attorney at law experts at Bret D. Lubic, PC to learn more. Call 503.232.3940 or click here today!

Bret D. Lubic,PC attorneys at law is focused on family law and estate planning matters. We handle cases in Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties, and the State of Oregon at large. Learn more about us click here.

Check us out on FacebookTwitter, and Linkedin as well!

Bookmark and Share