Recent Blog Posts in March 2011

If you’re seeking divorce advice in Pasadena, chances are the last thing you can imagine doing is going on vacation with your ex. But according to USA Today, divorce-cations are on the rise. Couples who have broken up are travelling together with the children to save money during the divorce process, create harmony and help families heal.

Hollywood star Bruce Willis has vacationed with ex-wife Demi Moore and their three daughters as well as her current husband, Ashton Kutcher, several times. Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson have also vacationed regularly with their children as has media mogul Arianna Huffington and her ex-husband Congressman Michael Huffington. But divorce-cations aren’t just for celebrity families with top therapists. Mike Geoffrion, who manages a bike store in Fort Collins, Colorado, told USA Today he’s vacationed with his ex-wife Janna on several occasions.

"If you get along with your ex it can be very easy to do," Geoffrion said.

He notes that the stresses of one parent doing all the supervision are also lifted when an ex is available to lend a hand.

Los Angeles exes Meredith Morton and Shane Edelman say they’ve also experienced success travelling with one another and their son and his half-siblings. Morton, Edleman, the kids and the new spouses all recently rented a house together in Palm Springs for three days to hang out by the pool. While a cheaper vacation is certainly appealing, it wasn’t the main motivation for the two families travelling together.

"It wasn't just like we were just sharing rent. We went to be with them," Morton said.

Psychologist Fran Walfish and author of The Self-Aware Parent says friendly divorced couples peacefully vacationing together “gets my complete endorsement” — but she notes that trips should be planned thoughtfully so they don’t get the children’s hopes up for a permanent reunion.

“Parents need to be clear that the trip is a special event, like a Disney visit or a birthday trip, and say, 'We really just wanted to both be with you,'" she adds.

Divorce attorneys in Pasadena often caution clients about what they choose to post on Facebook because inevitably anything scandalous or questionable that they share on the social network comes back to haunt them. Clearly Richard Leon Barton Jr. never received this advice. Barton was charged with polygamy last week after pictures of his first marriage surfaced on Facebook. The only problem? Barton never got divorced before marrying his current wife.

Adina Quarto, Barton’s first wife, turned her estranged husband into Michigan police not because she wanted him arrested but because she was hurt that her husband de-friended her on Facebook before he married wife No. 2 in July 2010. After Adina was dumped on Facebook, she dug around the unlocked sections of her husband’s profile and was shocked at what she discovered. Photos of Richard and his new wife were proudly displayed in his public photo album. Barton and Quarto discussed divorce but never went through with it.

"I didn't think he deserved to get away with it," said Quarto in an interview with Michigan Live. "I'm not a bitter person and I'm not trying to destroy the guy. If he wants to start a new life, more power to him, but he got married when he shouldn't have gotten married."

According to reports, Barton’s new wife is “absolutely shocked” at the polygamy charges. Polygamy, although a hot topic for television shows and movies, is no joke. A felony polygamy charge could cost Barton a potential fine of $5,000 and a four-year prison sentence. If he is found guilty, this won’t be Barton’s first time behind bars. He served time in 2004 in Michigan for “uttering and publishing” and home invasion. During his years in jail, Quarto claims the pair attempted to divorce but Barton never sent her the paperwork. Barton, however, maintains that he did in fact sign divorce paperwork while in prison in 2007.

Barton was freed from jail on a personal recognizance bond.

Pasadena, CA (PRWEB) March 28, 2011 - The Pasadena Bar Association will be hosting a Speech Scholarship Tournament at the Maranatha High School campus this Saturday, April 2, 2011 at 8:00 a.m., giving local high school students an opportunity to win scholarships.

Approximately 50 students representing local high schools, submitted applications to compete in the speech tournament.  Each competing student will be presenting a seven-minute speech, choosing from a list of three selected topics including Internet Privacy, 21^st Century Technology, or Freedom of Speech.

Two student finalists will be invited to compete on Law Day at the Pasadena Convention Center on May 12, 2011, and will have the opportunity to speak in front of 150 judges and lawyers where a winner will be selected.  A $5,000 scholarship will be awarded to the winner, and a $2,000 scholarship will be given to the runner-up.

In regards to the upcoming speech tournament, Vice President of the Pasadena Bar Association, Donald P. Schweitzer said, "We are so thrilled to be able to take a leadership role within the community, challenging our youth to develop their public speaking skills."

The Pasadena Bar Association has been organizing this event since last summer with expectations that the association can make a positive impact on local high school students and their ability to speak in public.

The Pasadena Bar Association assists its members to develop and improve their practice of law by providing information, services, networking, career development programs and other resources. The PBA has initiated numerous programs, services and opportunities for its members, the profession, the judiciary and the community.

Membership categories include: Active member, Barristers, New Admittee (first year to State Bar of California), Judicial Officer, Retired/Inactive, Affiliate member (non-attorney) and Student member.  Visit http://www.pasadenabar.org/ for more information

Seeking divorce advice in Pasadena and thinking it will never get better? That’s pretty common. Yet there’s always light at the end of the tunnel. Just look at New York Yankees superstar Alex Rodriguez. Back in 2008, he was baseball’s version of Tiger Woods. Rumors of affairs — including one with pop singer Madonna — caused wife Cynthia Rodriguez to file for divorce in June of 2008. A failed relationship and a steroid investigation later, things for Rodriguez appear to be looking up. A-Rod and Cameron Diaz were spotted nibbling food during the Super Bowl and since then the couple has been spotted playing happy family all over the East Coast.

Last week, paparazzi captured Diaz, Rodriguez and his two daughters — Natasha, 6, and Ella, 2 — at Busch Gardens amusement park in Florida. The happy foursome rode rides and did what normal folks do at the happiest place on earth, except for the whole being followed by cameras thing. In fact, the relationship of the baseball star and the movie star has been captured on quite a bit of film. Back in December, Diaz was photographed holding Ella in her arms while they were on vacation in Mexico. Most famously the couple was captured on video at the Super Bowl, where Diaz fed Rodriguez popcorn. Now Alex, Cameron and the kids have been photographed in Florida where Rodriguez is in town for spring training. Early reports from spring training say that A-Rod is leaner and more focused on the game than he has been in seasons past. Rodriguez has stunned sports journalist in spring training, scoring four home runs in his last five pre-season games. It’s a big turnaround for a star who had his worst season ever in 2010.

Alex Rodriguez and Cameron Diaz started dating one another last July. The 37-year-old Diaz has never been married and has no children. Matt Dillon, Jared Leto and Justin Timberlake are among the star's famous ex-boyfriends.

Billy Ray Cyrus surprised Hollywood insiders and divorce attorneys in Pasadena when he announced on TV's The View last week that he had called off his divorce to estranged wife Tish Cyrus. The sudden change of heart from the country singers comes on the heels of hot infidelity rumors (hers), an explosive drug scandal (involving teen daughter and pop star Miley Cyrus) and a GQ interview wherein the star blamed Hannah Montana for destroying his marriage. So how did the showbiz family on the brink of breakup find their way back together?

Cyrus told Barbara Walters and company on The View last week that saving his family had become his top priority.

"I've dropped the divorce," Cyrus, 49, said. "I want to put my family back together… Things are the best they've ever been."

According to People magazine, Cyrus and daughter Miley went through a rough patch after his headline-making interview with GQ. A source close to the singer told People “Miley is upset. She is very hurt and angry.”

But now the singer says he and his daughter are mending their relationship.

"I feel like I got my Miley back in a way," he added. "I feel like we are the daddy and daughter that we were before Hannah Montana happened."

He also told the ladies of the view while he doesn’t believe a television show could ruin a family, he does still think that celebrity is one big slippery slope.

“I don't think Hannah Montana ruined my family... Now fame, fame is a different animal. You've got to be careful with that thing," he said.

Billy Ray and Tish Cyrus decided to call it quits last October after 17 years of marriage. Tabloids reported that Tish Cyrus was having an affair with Poison lead singer and reality star Brett Michaels A few months later, the surprising video featuring Miley smoking salvia out of a bong hit the Internet.

If you’re seekingdivorce advice in Pasadena while struggling with a paternity dispute, you are not the only one. In fact, questions of paternity are not that uncommon for divorcing couples. High-profile paternity cases (think Eddie Murphy and Melanie Brown) have been on the rise for a couple of years. According to reports, actor Ryan Phillippe is the latest Hollywood star to be embroiled in a very public paternity case.

Phillippe, who divorced Oscar-winning actress Reese Witherspoon in 2006, started dating actress Alexis Knapp in June 2010 and broke up with the starlet in October. Just as the tabloids started following Phillippe’s on-again off-again relationship with Mama Mia star Amanda Seyfried , news of Knapp’s pregnancy exploded. Speculation ran rampant who the father could be as both Phillippe and Knapp remained mum on the topic. Then last week, Knapp’s camp said that Phillippe was indeed the father. Alexis’ mother Marjorie Knapp told RadarOnline, “She told me right away that it was Ryan’s. They were in a relationship.”

Sources close to the family told People magazine that Alexis Knapp will not be pressuring Phillippe for financial or parental responsibility.

"She has never asked Ryan for any help, nor does she expect it," said a representative for Knapp. While a paternity test will indeed be taken, Knapp’s rep says Alexis will not be speaking to the press about this sensitive subject. "Alexis has maintained her silence and will continue to do so. Any 'source' claiming to have been her or her camp up to this point is false. She continues to appreciate the love and support of her family and friends."

Marjorie Knapp adds “the bottom line is that it's not about how you get here on earth. ... We will welcome the baby.”

Alexis will be seen in So Undercover with Miley Cyrus this Thanksgiving.

Phillippe has two children with Witherspoon, who is set to marry talent agent Jim Toth in the upcoming weeks.

Divorce lawyers in Pasadena know how messy it can get when a spouse starts dating a friend’s ex. But when it comes to the oft-divorced skateboard legend Tony Hawk and his romance with Cathy Goodman, estranged wife of Hawk’s best friend Matt Goodman, things are surprisingly mature.

In an exclusive interview with RadarOnline.com, Matt Goodman said not only does he not hold any grudges against Hawk but he wish the pair well.

“I know people will think it is strange but I’m totally cool with it," Matt Goodman says. "I had split up with Cathy over a year ago and she started dating Tony about seven months ago."

Tony Hawk recently broke up with his third wife Lhoste Merriam to pursue his relationship with Cathy Goodman.

“I have a new girlfriend now and I hope Tony, Cathy, and Lhoste can all be happy," he adds. "Our kids are all friendly and we do not want a bad situation — people are making it a bigger deal than it is."

He also noted that he and Hawk have been in constant communication since news of the divorce broke a few weeks back. Goodman also confessed to RadarOnline.com that Hawk told him directly that he was romantically involved with Cathy.

“He told me about the relationship although I suspected something before that," Goodman says. "Life can be strange but I bear no grudges and just want to move on with my life now.”

Hawk has a son with Cindy Dunbar, whom he divorced in 1993, two sons with wife No. 2, Erin Lee, before that relationship ended in 2004, and one daughter with Lhoste Merriam. Merriam and Hawk announced their divorce on February 7, 2011. Hawk, whose skateboarding empire includes video games and an apparel line, is worth an estimated $120 million.

Diandra Douglas, ex-wife of Oscar-winning actor and cancer survivor Michael Douglas, shocked legal experts and divorce lawyers in Pasadena when she took her ex back to court 13 years after their divorce was settled. Last August, Diandra and her lawyers called foul on the 66-year-old for withholding earnings he took in from the Wall Street sequel released last year. The paychecks for the film, Diandra claimed, were in violation of the couple’s 1998 agreement which entitles her to a 50 percent cut from the royalties connected with Wall Street.

Now after months of enduring heartless "gold digger" insults, Diandra is speaking out.

“I am not a greedy person by nature,” Diandra tells Harper’s Bazaar in the latest issue on newsstand now. She says she did not know that Michael Douglas had cancer at the time of the lawsuit. "Michael didn't know he was ill, I didn't know he was ill, and the gods didn't know he was ill," she says. "I am not into going after sick people for things that don't belong to me."

She also says she wasn’t prepared for the attention the lawsuit garnered online and in the media. Diandra soon found herself being portrayed as a selfish witch trying to take money from a dying man.

"It's hurtful. I'm not made of cement. I'm a human being. I didn’t think it would turn into this huge media circus. That was not my intent,” she says.

In November, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Matthew Cooper dismissed the case, saying it had no place in a New York court. Diandra Douglas is currently pursuing the case in California where the couple was divorced.

Michael and Diandra Douglas were married in 1977 and had a son, Cameron Douglas, in 1978. Diandra filed for divorce in 1997 and was initially awarded a $45 million settlement.

When contemplating divorce, most people put themselves under undue stress worrying about their financial well being. Much of that stress is due to the fear of the unknown. So what do you do about it? Before, during, or after a divorce, it is important to keep yourself in reality as to your financial situation. Doing so will give you a sense of control over your life, which will reduce your stress level. Your financial situation can be broken into four different categories: assets, liabilities, income, and expenses. The following are some tips on how to effectively do that.

Assets

Assets have a way of disappearing after divorce proceedings start. As soon as divorce becomes a possibility, start by listing what assets you think the two of you own. That list would include:

• Cash. Do you keep any at home or in a safety deposit box?
• Checking account. The list would include personal, joint, business, or trust accounts.
• Savings or money-market accounts. Don't forget accounts set up for a "special purpose" such as Christmas club or annual or semiannual expenses. Those accounts are usually funded by payroll deduction and are set up to fund large and infrequent expenses such as the annual premium on the home or auto insurance, Christmas, and so on. Those accounts are easy to forget.
• Retirement accounts. These include IRAs, RRSPs, defined contribution plans and pension plans (government and private). Don't forget any plans from previous employers that were left behind.
• Non-retirement investment accounts. These include mutual funds, brokerage accounts, annuities, cash-value life insurance, certificates of deposit, and stocks or bonds held in certificate form.
• Real estate. This usually consists of the house and any other property owned by the couple.
• Employer-funded incentive programs. These could include stock-option programs, country-club initiation fees, banked vacation, and sick days.

Once you have your completed list, start collecting statements for every item on it. Investment companies send statements monthly or quarterly, depending on the type of account, the level of trading activity, and the company's policy. Most employer-sponsored plans send out a year-end statement in the first quarter of the following year. So don't panic if a statement you're looking for doesn't show up at the end of the first month after you start the process. If you have a safety deposit box and you don't have a list of its contents, visit the bank and make a list. Lastly, make a copy of the last mortgage closing paperwork. In order to qualify for a mortgage, you would have to disclose all of your assets, liabilities, and sources of income and the last five years' tax returns. Tax returns will show the sources and amount of income, especially if your spouse is self-employed.

Liabilities

Liabilities, unlike assets, have a way of appearing when divorce is pending. Other than listing liabilities, keep track of excessive increases in debt levels. If you see that happening, notify your lawyer immediately. As a general rule, any debt associated with an asset should travel with it. For example, whoever gets the car should get the car loan. If there's a business involved, always question any debts to relatives, friends, employees, and especially the owner spouse. If you detect such a loan, ask for a signed loan agreement, what the purpose of the loan is, and a payment plan.

Income

The next step is to identify the sources of income. Income includes revenue from full- and part-time employment, investment return, and self-employment income. Add up all the income from different sources to come up with total income.

Your and your spouse's income level is a factor in calculating child support and plays a role in arguing for alimony. Beware of close-relationship employers. I had a client who didn't understand why her husband's income was cut in half after he filed for divorce. After all, he worked for his brother's construction company.

Expenses

The next step is to figure out your budget now and post-divorce. Remember that the same amount of income supporting one household will need to support two.

The first step is to gather the necessary documentation that you would need in order to be objective. Those would include your check register and credit-card statements. As you list your expenses, make sure you don't "double dip." For example, if your cell phone bill is directly charged to your credit card, don't count your cell phone bill and the credit-card payment. An area that most people miss is cash withdrawals using ATM cards. You should be able to account for where that money was spent. When working on a budget, a good rule of thumb is to both have a number in each category and have a trusted and objective friend criticize your inputs.

Using two copies of the same budget chart, fill in pre-divorce expenses and post-divorce expenses. Go to the post-divorce chart and carry over each expense with an increase or decrease in its value. For example, an increase would be lawn care, if you would need to hire it out. Food, on the other hand, would decrease.

Now you're ready for your lawyer. You have a list of your assets, income, and expenses.

Let's look at an example on how it all fits in. John and Jane are 40 years old and have two children. They own a home worth $165,000 with net equity of $77,500. Their retirement accounts total $165,500 in value. John earns $90,000 a year and has take-home pay of $68,760 a year. Jane has never worked outside the home and has no job skills, but she hopes to get a job with take-home pay of $8,900 a year.

The following settlement has been suggested. After the divorce, Jane and the children will live in the marital home, which will be deeded to her. She will also receive $44,000 of the retirement money and John $121,500, thus dividing the assets equally. John will pay Jane alimony of $600 per month for five years and child support of $225 per month per child. He will also pay college costs, which start in four years.

John's expenses include his normal living expenses, child support, alimony, and college costs. Jane's expenses include support for the children and are reduced when each child leaves home.

This appears to be a reasonably fair settlement. However, Jane's assets will be completely depleted within seven years while John's investments will grow dramatically. The reason is that, soon after the divorce is final, she will need to tap into her assets to make ends meet. She could have anticipated this situation had she done her homework.

To improve Jane's financial future, the settlement could provide her with increased alimony of $1,500 per month for 10 years. After all, a major consideration for determining alimony or separate maintenance is the need of one spouse and the other's ability to pay. Both numbers are a result of income minus expenses. The correct child support, according the Child Support Guidelines in their state/province, is $1,125 per month for two children for a couple with their income. Jane also could be awarded an additional $24,300 from the retirement plans. She may also need to cut her expenses by 10%. John will still have a surplus, which he can add to his investments. If John stays within his budget and invests all of his extra income, his investments have the capacity to grow to $2.5 million by the time he is 60.

This sample case illustrates the value of preparation as a means of reaching a more financially equitable divorce settlement. If the court's intent is to treat both parties in a divorce as equitably as possible, it is essential to analyze the marriage as if it were a financial contract, with tangible investment into it by both parties. Without preparation, though, they wouldn't have been able to argue for more alimony or an uneven split of assets.

Fadi Baradihi is the president and CEO of the Institute for Certified Divorce Financial Analysts (IDFA). For more information about how a CDFA can help you with the financial aspects of your divorce, call (800) 875-1760, or visit their website at www.InstituteDFA.com.

Now, according to the Associated Press, the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML) have added their influential voice to the "is social media good or bad for marriage" discussion by pointing out that social media is a veritable gold mine for damming evidence.  

So, just how much evidence is buried in them there social media gold mines? The AAML says that a whopping 81% of its members have found court-worthy evidence from sources like Facebook, MySpace, Twiter, YouTube and LinkedIn. (By the way, Facebook wins the dubious race by supplying 66% of online divorce evidence.)

And if those statistics weren't shocking enough, here's a sampling of some of the things that people have inexplicably posted about themselves in the social networking space -- information that has been enthusiastically grabbed by their spouse's divorce lawyer:

• A mother denies marijuana use in court, but her wild, pot-filled Facebook photos prove otherwise.
• A husband claiming to have no anger management problems posts vulgar, threatening warnings on Facebook to "anyone who gets in his face."
• A mom is found to be spending time in an online game with her boyfriend instead of out with her children. 

And we saved the best one for last:

• A not-yet-divorced husband seeking custody of his children goes on a singles dating website and advertises himself as single and childless.

"You're finding information that you just never get in the normal discovery process  -- ever," notes Leslie Matthews, a Denver divorce lawyer. "People are just blabbing things all over Facebook. People don't yet quite connect what they're saying in their divorce cases is completely different from what they're saying on Facebook. It doesn't even occur to them that they'd be found out."

And it's not just self-destructive things that divorcing people advertise on social media programs. They also (mis)use it to wage battles and smear campaigns against their hated spouse. "It's all pretty good evidence," states Linda Lea Viken, president-elect of the AAML. "You can't really fake a page off of Facebook. The judges don't really have any problems letting it in."

While Divorce Lawyers accept that, as Forrest Gump sagely advised: "stupid is as stupid does," they nevertheless offer these tips for divorcing folks who simply need a nudge in the direction of common sense:

1. Social media posts and other content can and will speak for you in court. Make sure, if they say anything, that it's putting you in the right light.
2. Choose your "friends" wisely -- and beware those who encourage you to trash talk your spouse, his/her family, or anything else that will weaken your case
3. Stay away -- far, far away -- from cameras. Don't let others take and upload photos of you doing something you don't want the courts to see, and even more blatantly: don't take photos yourself and post them. That picture of you surfing naked with a beer can wait (possibly forever).
4. Learn and utilize your social media programs' privacy setting. And don't assume that privacy means privacy. Again, if it's not something you would say in court, don't put it online. Period.

Experiment with happiness
By Bethany J. Royer

Twice-married, twice-divorced Buddhist nun Pema Chodron says to treat life as an experiment.

Most couples who seek help feel their difficulties center around communication. Carl and Amanda echo this concern when they consult me. At their first session, I ask, “What brings you to seek help at this time?” “We don’t communicate,” Amanda replies. “That’s right,” says Carl. “We have problems with communication.” I inquire, “But what brings you in to see me at this time? Why now?” Amanda takes the lead. “Recently Carl lost his temper. That’s been happening a lot lately but this time, the force of his anger frightened me. I said to myself, ‘Something is wrong here.’ I don’t frighten easily. That’s when I knew we needed help.” Not all couples complain of explosive anger as a key problem, but it is far from a rarity that I hear this complaint. At this point, Carl slouches back on the deep purple couch and pulls a fringed pillow against his chest, as if it were a hot water bottle. Carl speaks haltingly. “She’s right about what she said. There’s something wrong, something missing.” “Can you tell me more about what is missing?” I reply. “Can you describe this thing that isn’t in your relationship now? This thing that you need.”

He nods his head, acknowledging my question; appears deep in thought; but, in the end, simply shrugs. My first hunch is that, like a lot of men, Carl grew up with little awareness that this skill talking about feelings would be so critical to his success or failure as a relational partner.

When Carl finally speaks, I learn that he feels like he is failing in his relationship with Amanda. He feels that, as a man, he should be able to maintain and project a stabilizing, reassuring presence. Amanda’s growing insecurity confirms just how far short Carl has fallen. He realizes, without being able to stop himself, how hurtful his lashing out at Amanda is. He is unhappy about the relationship and about who he is in it.

Although painful for Carl, his dissatisfaction with himself is a potentially hopeful sign. Embedded within his dissatisfaction is the wish to make more of the relationship than what currently exists. Carl, unknowingly, is poised to discover that he already possesses sufficient motivation to make the positive changes that, as yet, he cannot visualize.

Couples who lack a middle ground, like Amanda and Carl, feel underappreciated and misunderstood. Each feels alone and lonely in the other’s presence. Their attempts at communication end up in a power struggle. This situation is so common that it could be designated as the usual starting point for couples’ work: Square One.

WHAT IS THE “MIDDLEGROUND”?

Imagine a place that brings the potential for love and compassion alive within your relationship. What would you call a place where you and your partner learn to communicate more productively? What would you call a place where understandings can develop from genuine differences? What name would you give a place in which natural capacities for sharing can be unfrozen and an atmosphere of emotional safety can flourish? I call this place the “middle ground.”

If you are looking for help in your relationship, it’s very likely you can’t see this place clearly. Perhaps you’ve seen it but didn’t recognize what you were witnessing. Perhaps you have never not even within your imagination had a glimpse of it. This is the middle ground.

This book will help you identify the middle ground potential in your relationship and guide you in developing it.

Family attorneys in Pasadena have certainly seen an increase in divorce cases that involve social networking sites like Facebook. Recently websites and major news outlets have been reporting startling numbers and statistics regarding Facebook and divorce. Some reports claim that one in five divorces are linked to Facebook — and others say the number of divorces involving social media sites is much higher.

Experts, however, are now saying those widely-reported statistics are way off.

Carl Bialik, who writes a statics and numbers column for The Wall Street Journal, says the tossed-around statistics are frequently misunderstood. The one in five number caught fire last summer when Divorce Online released the statistic after it conducted a survey of the site's users. Bialik says the number is a generalization, especially considering “the site’s users tend to be young, owing to its online presence and that it is likely to appeal to people seeking relatively simple divorces, without thorny issues such as child custody.”

Mark Keenan, managing director of Divorce Online, admits that this number isn’t a true representation of all divorces. Also poking holes in the figure could be the fact that it originated in the United Kingdom, where no-fault divorces aren’t allowed so divorcees looking for a reason might be quick to point to Facebook as a cause. And then there’s the issue of general misinformation around the statistic. CNN said it originated from a survey of 5,000 lawyers (even though it did not) while Loyola University attributed the stat to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

Regardless of how accurate the statistics are, lawyers and legal experts have noticed a spike in the number of cases involving social media, online dating and Facebook. But the phenomenon of cheating on your spouse using technology isn’t a new concept.

“People have met online for years,” said Randall M. Kessler, chair-elect of the family law section of the American Bar Association. “Using the Internet to create relationships is not anything new. It predates Facebook.”

Having two marital affairs and still walking away with millions is not usually how things play out for cheating spouses — but that’s exactly what happened for Susan Sosin. Divorce attorneys in Pasadena were surprised when the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld a $3.8 million judgment against AIG founder Howard Sosin. The court found that Sosin had shortchanged his ex-wife in one of the priciest divorces in the country.

Poor Howard Sosin. The 60-year-old derivatives specialist filed for divorce from Susan in 2003 after discovering hundreds of steamy e-mails between his wife and her lover. Susan later admitted in court to having two extramarital affairs while she was married to Howard. Things got worse in a lower court in Bridgeport when a judge ordered Howard to pay Susan nearly $25 million in cash after their 2005 divorce trial. The hefty cash prize was on top of the estimated $20 million in real estate and personal property he was forced to hand over.

Yet Howard didn’t exactly listen to the court when it came time to fork over the money. Sosin initially paid her "only" $20 million back in November 2005, claiming the judge overvalued one of his bank accounts. Susan eventually received an additional $4 million in March 2006 for what Howard considered to be the remainder of what he owed her plus interest. Nevertheless, Howard Sosin appealed to the state Appellate Court and Supreme Court.

In a decision reached on February 3^rd 2011, the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld the Appellate Court’s decision which confirmed the rulings of Superior Court Judge Howard Owens Jr. who had ordered Howard Sosin to pay Susan Sosin the initial $24 million and later ordered him to pay the remainder plus interest. Susan is reportedly thrilled with the court’s decision and, according to her attorneys, is currently perusing the exact amount of interest Howard owes on the settlement. At the time of the 2005 divorce, Susan Sosin’s additional divorce earnings included a $2 million Utah ski house, a Manhattan apartment and a country home in Wallkill, New York.

Heading to the bar after a contentious divorce is a pretty typical response seen regularly byfamily lawyers in Pasadena. So too, unfortunately, is the penchant to overindulge. Friends of pop star Christina Aguilera are saying a stressful divorce from record executive Jordan Bratman and career disappointments have caused the singer to spin out of control with binge drinking and excessive overeating. Since her divorce last winter, Aguilera famously flubbed the National Anthem at the Super Bowl, slipped on stage at the Grammys, and been arrested for being drunk in public. Now friends of the Grammy-award-winning performer worry that new boyfriend Matthew Rutler is a bad influence on her.

Long after the bars had closed on the morning of March 1^st Aguilera and Rutler were pulled over and arrested by West Hollywood police on DUI-related charges. Authorities said Aguilera was “extremely intoxicated” and she was held at the police station until she sobered up. Rutler, who was driving that night, was released on $5,000 bail.

Late night partying for the pair, say sources close to the singer, is a regular occurrence.

“He is the one taking her out all the time,” a source told Star magazine. “Matthew likes the nightlife, and Christina always wants to be with him.”

Friends tell the magazine they are extremely concerned for the singer and worry that Matthew is enabling Christina.

“Christina’s lost her confidence since she split from Jordan,” says an insider. “She gets terribly sad, and that’s when all the awful memories come flooding back and she ends up numbing herself with booze and food.”

Star is reporting Aguilera allegedly has gained 40 pounds since her divorce. Rutler’s family, however, says the production assistant is a good kid and the arrest has been blown out of proportion.

“Matt was only like .01 over the legal limit… it’s not like he was that drunk," David Rutler, Matthew’s dad, told Radar Online. "There are drugs and gangs running rampant in L.A., and they have a press conference about Matt.”

He notes that his son has “perfect record” and has “never been in trouble.”

Meanwhile, Aguilera’s career received a shot in the arm last week when it was announced she would be one of the judges on The Voice, NBC’s answer to American Idol.

Family attorneys in Pasadena have seen nosy exes do some pretty crazy things, but nothing like the father-daughter duo of Sam and Dianna Divingnzzo. The Divingnzzos were busted last month for violating wiretapping laws by a federal judge, who ordered them to pay $120,000 after they admitted to bugging a teddy bear so they could spy on Dianna's ex-husband, William Lewton.

A judge in Omaha, Nebraska, ruled that they broke serious privacy laws back in January to June 2008 when the two amateur snoops tore the head off Dianna and William’s daughter’s favorite teddy bear and placed a recording device on the inside of the stuffed animal. During the custody hearing, knowledge of the "teddy bear tapes" became public, which promoted Lewton to file the lawsuit.

Lewton was shocked that his ex would go to such lengths to spy on him.

"Being her favorite teddy bear, I just can't fathom the thought of somebody taking the little bear's head off and putting a bugging device for whatever reason," he told local reporters.

U.S. Judge F.A. Gossett said in a 27-page decision the Divingnzzos violated federal wiretapping laws. An attorney for the Divingnzzos said his clients were shocked by the judge’s decision and they were disappointed that a jury did not get to hear the case. He also said they planned on arguing a case that said Lewton’s interaction with their daughter should have been monitored and a jury would have agreed. The conversations and footage recorded by the teddy bear were not heard in court as a previous ruling determined the tapes to have violated Nebraska’s wiretapping laws and therefore could not be used as evidence.

William Lewton’s lawyer said they plan on pursuing the case in state court as well.

"Technology has changed the way people can collect information about their spouses and ex-spouses," he said. "This particular case is sort of the perfect storm of illegal and wrong behavior coming to light."

Women in the military put their lives on the line for their country. But according to new statistics, many of them also fight to keep their marriages alive. Servicewomen, say the numbers directly from the Pentagon, are twice as likely to join the ranks of those seeking divorce advice in Pasadena than their male military counterparts.

An estimated 220,000 women have served in Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2009, 7.8 percent of women in the military got a divorce, according to Pentagon statistics recently published by The Associated Press and ABC News. In contrast, only 3 percent of military men filed for divorce. Almost 9 percent of the military’s female enlisted corps and not-commissioned officers wound up divorced, compared to just more than 3 percent of the men.

According to an article published in 2010 by Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and the Brookings Institution, military women also get divorced at higher rates than civilian wives outside of the military. Military men, on the other hand, divorce at much lower rates than civilian husbands. The armed forces also has more single moms than single dads, meaning military children are deeply affected by the statistics as well. Yet why women in the military are divorcing more remains a mystery.

Experts theorize societal pressures could be a contributing factor. It's a strange situation: As the military increasingly treats women the same as it treats men in terms of their work expectations, society still expects them to fulfill their family roles. And that's not equally balanced between men and women, says David Segal, director of the Center for Research on Military Organization at the University of Maryland.

Others say women GIs are less conventional, therefore making it less likely they would stay in a bad marriage. Retired Air Force Colonel Kimberly Olson says the marital pressures could be caused by the armed forces' own old-fashioned values. “You’ve got to look at the realities of what military life is like on the family, and it really is kind of set up around a traditional married model of a husband (who works) and a wife that runs the house, if you will,”she says.

Olsen also believes many returning women warriors are thrown back into their roles as wives and mothers without time to transition.

Many women seeking divorce advice in Pasadena often worry about the stigma attached to being a single mother. It’s no mystery as to why. Although America has slowly embraced nontraditional families, the country overall still seems like it has mixed feelings about single moms. Now a new poll by the Pew Research Center says Americans do, in fact, still view single mothers as detrimental to society.

Even though the calendar says its 2011, the minds of some Americans when it comes to the roles of mother are clearly stuck in the 1950s, the report notes.

"People aren't embracing these changes, but they are accepting them," Rich Morin, author of the report as well as an editor at Pew told The Washington Post, adding "the days when people were made to wear a scarlet letter or were shunned after a divorce are ancient history."

Pew researchers asked more than 2,500 Americans their thoughts about seven trends in modern relationships that go against the grain of what used to be considered the traditional family: gay couples raising children together, single mothers, partners living together outside of marriage, interracial married couples, women who never have children, and unmarried parents jointly raising children. The poll found that one third said the trends are positive or don’t really affect society while another third considered the changes harmful to society. The rest said they accepted all the changes to the modern family — except for single motherhood.

Sociologist Andrew Cherlin says the results reflect our ideals of two-parent homes.

“Working mothers are acceptable to almost everybody," Cherlin said. "Two parents who are unmarried are tolerated or acceptable. But many people, including single parents themselves, question single-parent families. There's still a strong belief that children need two parents."

But Cherlin also believes that most Americans are primarily concerned for the welfare of children of divorce.

"They're concerned about the economic problems of single mothers, and the amount of effort it takes to be a good parent," he adds. "People aren't anti-single mother as much as they are pro-two parents."

Divorce attorneys in Pasadena are used to seeing May-December rebound relationships after high-profile Hollywood divorces. So the post-Oscars hookup of Sean Penn and Scarlett Johansson seemed like standard stuff. The pair ran off to Mexico while, back in La-La Land, bets were placed on how long the tryst would last. But now insiders are saying the couple has actually gotten serious.

On Tuesday, March 1^st, gossip websites nearly exploded with photos of the 50-year-old Penn having a romantic lunch with the 26-year-old Johansson in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. According to sources, the pair nibbled on lobster and sipped margaritas. Penn and Johansson left Los Angeles on a private jet and returned the following Wednesday morning. Prior to the Mexican getaway, the pair was also spotted in Los Angeles eating Cuban food at popular restaurant Versailles where Johansson reportedly had her leg draped over Penn’s — this after reportedly flirting with one another at a party celebrating Black Swan.

Sources close to the couple are now saying what looked like a fling could very well be a serious romance. A friend of Johansson’s tells PopEater.com that she has fallen fast for the actor, who is 24 years her senior.

“She thinks Sean is amazing. Sure, he’s an incredible actor, but there’s depth. He’s an amazing human being who cares about politics and the world,” the source told PopEater.

Reps for the actors, who previously had denied the couple's romantic involvement, are now declining to comment.

Johansson and actor Ryan Reynolds ended their marriage in December of 2010 after two years. Reynolds has since been linked toProposal costar Sandra Bullock and German model Agnes Fischer. Actress Robin Wright filed for divorce from Penn in August 2009 and their divorce was finalized last July. The couple had been married for 13 years.

Divorce attorneys in Pasadena — who have seen their share of wild celebrity exploits — agree that nothing compares to the recent antics of Charlie Sheen. In one week’s time, his hit show on CBS has been temporarily cancelled, he has willingly taken a drug test for an online gossip site and launched a million tirades via interviews with every network and website that would sit still. Now Sheen’s wild behavior has resulted in a restraining order from estranged wife Brooke Mueller, who recently had the police retrieve the couple’s twin sons from Sheen’s home.

On Tuesday, March 1, police arrived at the mansion of Charlie Sheen under instruction from a judge who ordered the twins be returned to their mother. The judge temporarily stripped the actor of custody of the boys after Mueller submitted a declaration stating that Sheen threatened Mueller by saying, “I will cut your head off, put it in a box, and send it to your mom.”

Legal experts say courts don’t take threats like this lightly.

“If a judge receives credible evidence that a person poses a threat to another parent or their children, they grant restraining orders first and ask questions later, to err on the side of caution," says one LA legal expert.

Police officers took the twins, who will turn two this month, back to Mueller who claims Sheen had violated terms of their temporary custody agreement. Prior to the events of the last several months, Sheen was reportedly seeking full custody of the children. Sources close to Mueller say she is in fact sober and currently seeking full custody of the twins.

"I am very concerned that [Sheen] is currently insane," Mueller stated in the document. "I am in great fear that he will find me and attack me and I am in great fear for the children's safety while in his care.”

Sheen, for his part, has told Radaronline.com, “My fangs are dripping with tiger's blood” in response to the removal of his children... and when asked by People magazine if he was ready for a custody battle, he replied via text, “Born ready. Winning.”

A hearing has been set for March 22 to determine if the restraining order should be extended. Sheen and Mueller are both required to attend.

To mediate or not to mediate? That is the question for many newly-speared couples seeking divorce advice in Pasadena. After all, mediation can be an effective way for couples to sort out their issues without having to go to court. In England, mediation is now required for all separating couples in an effort to reduce the number of couples who spend months embroiled in expensive divorce battles.

On Wednesday, Britain announced that divorcing couples will be referred to mediation first to sort out most marital disputes before they are allowed to use the courts. Justice Minister Jonathan Djanogly believes that mediation is "a quicker, cheaper and more amicable alternative" to the country’s over-worked and cash-strapped family courts. England and Wales will enforce the mediation regulations beginning on April 6, 2011. British officials are quick to note that domestic violence and child protection cases, however, will still go to court.

"Mediation already helps thousands of legally-aided people across England and Wales every year, but I am concerned those funding their own court actions are missing out on the benefits it can bring," Djanogly said. "Now everyone will have the opportunity to see if it could be a better solution than going straight to court.”

Under the new rules, any person seeking a divorce will have to undergo a mediation assessment first. If it’s decided that mediation is not a viable option, only then can the case proceed to court.

At the heart of England’s new affinity for mediation is the cost of divorces. Opponents to mandatory meditation say that the new law could hurt those who rely on the country’s free legal aid.

"The government is creating a myth that mediation is a panacea in order to justify cuts to legal aid which will take areas such as this, where people desperately need advice out of scope,” says Law Society president Linda Lee.

Djanogly, on the other hand, sees mediation as a way to cut down on the country’s $2 billion a year spent on legal aid.

"Our proposals aim to radically reform the system and encourage people to take advantage of the most appropriate sources of help, advice or routes to resolution — which will not always involve the expense of lawyers or courts."

How many people who file for divorce in Pasadena retrospectively wish they had asked a lawyer to help them draft a prenuptial agreement? In the United States, prenuptial agreements are legally binding. In the United Kingdom, such agreements are not. Not so fast… It turns out that the United Kingdom's Supreme Court may have set a precedent for legally-binding prenuptial agreements in the UK.

High-profile UK divorce agreements — such as the 2008 divorce of Paul McCartney and Heather Mills as well as JP Morgan banker Nicolas Granatino and his wife — have led the United Kingdom to consider making US-style prenuptial agreements legally binding. Under current law in the UK, the courts decide how property should be shared between a divorcing couple. But this month, the UK Law Commission began the process of changing prenuptial agreement laws.

“This is an issue that needs to be handled with care,” says Elizabeth Cooke, a commissioner who is leading a public consultation on the issue.

She explained that the review will look into “how a new approach might balance the desire of some couples to plot their own future with more certainty against the need for safeguards against exploitation and the creation of hardship.”

In the case of McCartney and Mills, no prenuptial agreement was signed by the couple and Mills won a settlement of $37.7 million. In the case of JP Morgan banker Nicolas Granatino, his claim asserted that his prenuptial agreement with then-wife Katrin Radmacher, a German heiress, should not be enforced, citing Radmacher’s failure to disclose the entirety of her wealth. In the end, the judges did not defer to the prenuptial agreement and Granatino was awarded around $10 million. On appeal, the decision was overturned and the Supreme Court determined that prenuptial agreements, when agreed upon freely, are enforceable.

After the Radmacher judgment, more people are seeking prenuptial agreements in the UK.

“After the judgment, we have seen a lot more inquiries,” says London divorce lawyer Caroline Wright.

It’s a fairy tale in reverse. After being married to an Italian prince for eight years, actress Olivia Wilde has left her happily-ever-after castle in Italy as her career in Hollywood is on the verge of exploding, with rumors of high-profile roles being hers for the taking. Wilde and husband Tao Ruspoli mutually agreed to separate earlier this month; since then, divorce attorneys in Pasadena and tongues in Tinseltown have been wagging about what’s next for the suddenly a-list actress.

Star of the recent blockbuster, Tron: Legacy and long-time series regular on the hit medical TV series "House," Wilde married Ruspoli when she was only nineteen years old. The couple eloped on a school bus in Virginia with just two witnesses on June 7, 2003.

Wilde told GQ in 2009 that friends and family worried about her getting married so young.

“There were times when people thought it would really hurt me," she said. "People said I shouldn’t be married, or lie about being married, or I should be married to a movie star or rock star.”

By Hollywood standards, Wilde and Ruspoli had a long-lasting marriage. But the star admitted she had doubts about the union, too.

“Even in the beginning, we never put pressure on ourselves,” Wilde told Men’s Health just last month. “We were like, ‘Maybe it’ll last a week.’ And therefore it’s lasted years.”

Wilde has recently been seen walking the red carpet alone. Sources close to the couple say they have been living apart after trying for quite some time to make their relationship work.

With no children to look after, the newly-single Wilde is free to pursue her red-hot career. Movie blogs are speculating that Wilde is being considered for the role of Lois Lane in the latest Superman reboot as well as the title role in Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. Neither role has been confirmed, but in the meantime, Wilde can be seen in the big budget summer sci-fi film Cowboys and Aliens and the romantic comedy The Change-Up co-starring Ryan Reynolds.