ILNews

IBA: What Every Woman Should Know to Protect Herself in the Event of Divorce

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

By Amy Carson, Laura Gaskill, Robin Kelly and Gloria K. Mitchell, all of Mitchell & Associates

Advising clients contemplating divorce varies with the style of the attorney. Even so, there are fundamental issues every woman considering or beginning the divorce process should know to protect herself financially. 

Divorce Fundamentals. Indiana is a no-fault state, meaning that the reason for the divorce is not relevant to the court. The Petition for Dissolution of Marriage generally states that there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage and it should be dissolved. After the petition if filed, there is a required 60-day cooling off period before the divorce can be final.

Date of filing. The date a Petition for Dissolution is filed is the date a court looks at to determine what is in the marital estate, both assets and debts. Any assets acquired/earned or debts incurred after the date of filing will generally not go into the marital estate and belong solely to the party who accrued the asset or incurred the debt.

Division of Assets. Indiana follows the “one pot theory,” meaning that any assets or debts brought into the marriage, or acquired during the marriage, are included in the marital estate, unless there is a prenuptial agreement indicating otherwise. The presumption is that the marital estate is divided 50/50; however, either party can attempt to persuade the judge that 50/50 would not be fair.

Spousal Maintenance. Indiana is not an alimony state, which means a court cannot order that alimony be paid unless the parties both agree that alimony should be paid; since the payment of alimony may be financially advantageous to both parties, this kind of agreement is uncommon. Spousal maintenance, however, can be ordered by the court. There are three instances when a court can order that one spouse pay maintenance to the other. These include the following: when a spouse is the custodian of a child with physical/mental incapacity such that it impairs that spouse’s ability to work; or if a spouse is physically/mentally incapacitated such that he/she cannot work; or if a spouse is in need of rehabilitative maintenance because he/she needs training or schooling in order to re-enter the workforce.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT