Because he wants to talk.
Apparently there is a prenuptial agreement that does more than just divide property and settle support. The prenup also contains a confidentiality clause which prohibits Kim and Kris from discussing publicly the details of their “marriage.”
Kim wants to make it simple. She wants a divorce. After all, it was only a 72 day marriage and there is a valid prenup.
But Kris has other ideas. He has countered with a claim for an annulment based on fraud.
A divorce dissolves a valid marriage. An annulment is a court finding that the marriage never existed. If there were no nuptials there is no prenuptial agreement. And then Kris can tell those who want to listen all the details of the marriage. Obviously, he is “banking” that those who want to listen, want to listen enough to pay him. Unfortunately, he’s probably right.
Here’s hoping the judge orders all profits from their ridiculous show and this sham of a marriage to go to charity.
In determining the validity of a prenuptial agreement, Connecticut law requires fair and reasonable disclosure of amount, character, and value of property, financial obligations and income before the execution of a prenuptial agreement.
In a recent Connecticut divorce, the judge found a prenuptial agreement valid and enforceable even though the agreement failed to include the Husband’s interests in a business. The court apparently found that there was fair and reasonable disclosure since the Wife was otherwise aware of the Husband’s business interests.
Two thoughts:
1. The law requires “fair” and “reasonable” disclosure. What is “fair” and “reasonable” are subject to a particular judge’s interpretation. Even though something less than “full” disclosure is required, the better practice is avoid this defense altogether. Therefore, when representing the party who is requesting the prenuptial agreement, disclose it all.
2. The agreement in this case was signed a day before the wedding. The opinion does not address the requirement that prenuptial agreements must be executed voluntarily (i.e. no duress). It would seem therefore that the duress argument was not made at trial. Notwithstanding, waiting until the day before your wedding to execute a prenuptial, invites trouble for purpose of enforcement.
The holidays can be an stressful time of the year for everyone: rushing to get “just the right” gifts, hosting houses full of relatives and remembering loved ones who are no longer a part of the celebrations. While a fun time of the year, emotions often run high. And emotions often run even higher for divided families, who are trying to find time to spend with their children yet plan around the schedules of their exes and extended families. Scheduling becomes a nightmare and child custody becomes a battle.
Disputes between couples over who gets the kids on Christmas Day and during the holiday vacation often leads to last minute filing of “emergency” motions. Keep the following in mind:
- Settled custody arrangements and existing visitation or parenting plans are not usually altered simply because you want your children with you on Christmas. Judges expect that, as part of your divorce proceedings, you already negotiated and agreed to holiday custody arrangements. They will stick to those pre-established agreements.
- Family law judges make decisions based on “the best interests of the children.” Just because your ex normally has them on Christmas and you promised the kids an out of town trip that weekend, the judge will not order your ex to hand them over.
- Expect to spend a considerable amount of time at the courthouse. A lot of court employees, judges and attorneys take vacation over the holidays so staffing is often at a minimum. Fewer judges and clerks and increased hearing requests can mean long wait times. What is an “emergency” hearing for you (like filing a last minute plea to establish a holiday visitation schedule) may not seem as urgent for a judge.
If you do need help with a child custody or visitation matter for the holidays, seek advice from an attorney experienced in handling parenting plans and custody agreements.
Source: When the Vows Break: ‘Tis the Season for Long Lines in Divorce Court
The holidays are here. It is a time for gatherings, gifts and cheer. It is also a time of year when divided families struggle with where children will spend the holidays and school vacation.
In anticipation of the holidays, divorced parents with minor children should do the following:
1. Review the court orders concerning holiday visitation at least a few weeks beforehand.
2. Discuss with the other parent your understanding of the court orders/schedule.
3. If there is a legitimate disagreement mediation or court involvement may be necessary. Do not wait until the last minute! Allow enough time to participate in mediation or to file motions in court.
Conflicting orders?
Most Parenting Plans state that holiday visitation supersedes the regular visitation schedule. For example, this year Christmas falls on a Sunday. Parent A is scheduled to have their alternate weekend visitation beginning Friday December 23. However, the Parenting Plan states that in odd years Parent B will have Parenting Time during Christmas weekend. Parent B’s Parenting Time supersedes the alternate weekend time for Parent A.
What if there is no court order regarding the holidays?
Some Parenting Plans do not specify how holidays are to be handled. In this event, put the interests of the children first. Both parents should respect religious practices of the children and the schedules/activities of the children (especially true for older children).
I doubt judges or attorneys had this in mind when thinking about “fitness” in the context of custody cases.
To be clear -this is not about parental fitness. No. It is about the child’s fitness – as in their physical fitness. Seems there is an increased focus on a child’s diet, nutrition, exercise and weight in contested custody cases. If the lack of fitness is attributed to one parent, it might effect how a court decides child custody.
And a parent’s physical fitness has been called into question as well. A mother in a recent custody case went so far as to claim that the father’s own obesity prevented him from performing basic childrearing functions.
In Connecticut, there are a few “best interest” factors which could arguably encompass some of these arguments.
For example, the capacity and disposition of the parents to understand and meet the basic needs of the child – i.e. proper diet and exercise. Or perhaps, in an extreme case of parental obesity like the one mentioned above, the ability of a parent to be actively involved in the child’s life might prove difficult. But, the far more likely scenario is a situation where the overall health of a child is so compromised that the child is neglected or even abused. In this situation, removal of the child from the offending parent would be warranted. This might occur in family court as part of a custody proceeding or in juvenile court by way of DCF filing a Neglect Petition.
Have a look at the article below:
Temporary Restraining Order filing are increasing in Connecticut.
Some useful distinctions. People often use the terms “restraining order and protective order” interchangeably. In fact, they differ fundamentally.
A protective order is issued by a criminal court as part of a pending criminal case. It expires once the case is disposed.
A Restraining Order is issued by the Family Court and can be extended in increments of six months as circumstances warrant. A restraining order requires a judge to find that a family or household member has subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by another family or household member or by someone with whom they are currently or recently have been in dating relationship with.
A Temporary Restraining Order occurs when the person seeking protection files the initial Application along with an Affidavit setting forth why they need protection right now and cannot wait for the court to schedule a hearing. If the judge agrees, then the Restraining Order is issued immediately and a court date scheduled in 14 days to determine whether the order should be continued up to one year.
The article below outlines in general terms how the application process works. I agree with the premise in the article that there has been an increase in the filing of restraining orders – particularly borderline frivolous filings. Worse yet, is the scenario where an applicant involved in a divorce case files a bogus restraining order in an attempt to obtain custody of a child.
Read the article here:
Requests for temporary restraining orders on the rise – Connecticut Post
I help people concerning a Temporary Restraining Order throughout Fairfield County including Easton, Fairfield, Monroe, Trumbull, Stratford, Bridgeport, Westport, Weston, New Canaan, Wilton, Norwalk, Darien, Stamford and Greenwich.
Contact me online or call my Fairfield office at (203) 259-5251 or my Stamford office at (203) 356-1475 today schedule a consultation.