In this divorce case the attorney for the wife withdrew from representing her 13 days before the final hearing. On appeal, it was found that this was improper and the case was reversed and remanded.

This case provides a good discussion of the procedure that is to be followed when an attorney withdraws from a case. Also, the client’s rights in such a situation.

Here’s the link…
Duncan v. Duncan

Court of Appeals holds that a trial court may make decisions as to whether property is marital and/or whether it is actually owned by a person/entity not a party to the divorce. However, the trial court does not have the authority to rule that the parties must transfer by warranty deed a piece of property to a non-party. Non-parties need to intervene in the case if they believe they own the property.

Here’s the link…
Wise v. Wise

This case is about as protracted as it gets. Several hearings; multiple allegations; multiple drugs; multiple drug tests; and more.

Provides a good example of the types of evidence needed in these types of cases.

Here’s the link…
Poole v. Poole

It is common practice for a judge, at the conclusion of a hearing, to designate one of the attorneys to draft the order of the court. Sometimes the attorney drafts it immediately. Sometimes there is a delay due to a number of different reasons.

In this case, the court divided a retirement account held by the husband. It was divided equally between the parties. 4 years later the decree was finally entered. The retirement account increased significantly in value during that time. Husband wanted the division to be as of the date of the hearing, 4 years earlier, as opposed to the date the decree was entered. Wife objected.

The Court of Appeals held that the account is to be divided as of the date the decree is entered, as had been held in prior Arkansas cases. The husband failed to show he had suffered any injustice by the delay in getting the decree drafted.

I’m betting he would disagree.

Here’s the link…
Churchill v. Churchill

Wife signs over interest in real property due to her husband being the dominant party in the relationship and also because she owed a debt, needed money to pay the debt, and husband used that knowledge to his advantage. Is this enough for wife to save her interest in the property at the final divorce hearing? Court of Appeals says yes.

Here it is…
McCracken v. McCracken

The final decision in this case is not earth shattering, but it provides a good discussion of how DHS operates during the course of a case. As always, if a parent will follow the case plan then reunification is likely. If the parent does not follow the case plan then termination is likely.

Here’s the case…
http://courts.arkansas.gov/court_opinions/coa/2009b/20091028/ca09-611.pdf

Administrative Order No. 10 provides guidance as to calculating a payor’s net income for child support. A distinction is made between self-employed payors and those that are not self-employed.

In this case, the payor was previously self-employed but was not self-employed for the months leading up to the final hearing. Nonetheless, the trial court used the self-employed methodology contained in Administrative Order No. 10. The Court of Appeals reverses due to that error.

Here’s the case…
http://courts.arkansas.gov/court_opinions/coa/2009b/20091021/ca08-1451.pdf

As you might suspect, divorce shines a light on just about everything that is private in your life. In this Orlando, Florida divorce, nude photographs of the wife are at issue. Turns out that husband decided to put them on a spanish pornography site. Wife has sued him stating that the photos were meant only for her husband, not to be distributed over the internet.
At first blush (no pun intended:), it seems that the photos are technically marital property and therefore belong to both the husband and the wife - to do with what he or she wants. But in all fairness, should a spouse be able to do something like this and get away with it?

A decision has not yet been made by the court.

Here’s a link to the article…
Click here for article
http://cbs4.com/local/divorce.nude.photographs.2.1140184.html

Time magazine asks this question in the following article…
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1930772,00.html?xid=rss-topstories-polar

The police in Sumner County, Tennessee say “yes.”

Here’s the link…
http://www.abajournal.com/news/did_court_order_ban_facebook_poke/?from=widget