Sue and John have been married for ten years. Within those years they have had their mountains and their valleys. Sue even forgave John when he had a dalliance with their son's school bus driver. But now John is seriously interested in someone new, and she does mean a lot to him, enough that he wants to end his marriage. Sue isn't quite ready to call it quits. John has strayed before, so Sue
suggests a legal separation. She has had her work hours cut recently, due to illness, and she doesn't see how she can support herself and her son without John's help. How would Sue benefit from a legal separation?
What will be an ideal response?
If John agrees to a legal separation, he and Sue can live apart. He would still be legally married to her, so he couldn't marry his new "sweetie" right away.
This separation would give him and Sue a "cooling-off" period allowing them to re-think their marital situation and maybe even reconcile in the future. It would also give them time to think on matters of custody of their minor son, support, and property division, if it came to that. There are procedural mechanisms that would allow them to convert the legal separation to a divorce. If Sue is also very religious, a divorce might be frowned upon by her church. In addition, because her health is poor she might benefit from John's insurance coverage. While she only works part-time she might not receive coverage from her employer. A divorce might end the insurance benefit. Financially, she may qualify for federal Social Security because their marriage has met the ten-year minimum requirement. Sue feels her counter-proposal to divorce is a win situation, for her.
You might also like to view...
In states that allow nuncupative wills, the testator does not have to be legally capable of making a written will.?
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
Bert is having dinner with his associates in a private room at a local steakhouse. The room has doors that close it off to the general public. Bert had asked that once dinner was served that the doors be closed and that the wait staff not enter the room until summoned by Bert. These instructions are followed just as Bert requested and once dinner is served and the staff has left, Bert and his associates begin to discuss their human trafficking business. In the middle of the conversation, another patron, Karen, mistakenly opens the door looking for a group she is joining for dinner. Karen hastily withdraws, but as she did she heard one of Bert's associates how much they can expect to profit from the sale of each child. Karen is shocked and calls the police. The subsequent
investigation yields sufficient evidence to arrest and charge Bert and his associates. Prior to trial, Bert's attorney challenges the use of Karen's statement at trial claiming that Bert had a reasonable expectation of privacy which was violated when Karen opened the door and overheard the conversation. The judge will find in favor of Bert as Karen's action and subsequent statements violate Bert's Fourth Amendment rights. Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
Dispositive sanctions are the same as
a. death penalty sanctions. b. fines. c. striking pleadings. d. contempt of court.
Bankruptcy Code 11 U.S.C. §329(a) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2016(b) requires attorneys representing debtors to disclose the "compensation paid or agreed to be paid, if such payment or agreement was made after one year before the date of the filing of the petition," within 30 days after the case is filed
Indicate whether the statement is true or false