2) The tax consequences of the fork can be reimbursed to the other party; AND v. a judge`s order or decision that a matter within a case may be heard at a conclusion or judgment at a stage of the case without hearing all aspects of the case. A typical example is when the judge makes a divorce judgment without hearing evidence or making a decision on issues such as the division of marital property, custody or spousal support (alimony). In this way, the parties can be released from each other in a timely manner while they calmly discuss other issues. In a case of negligence where the question of liability (liability) is clearly dubious or based on a legal formality, the court may divide the issues and hear evidence of the defendant`s liability and decide this question before initiating proceedings on the amount of damages. If the court decides that there is no liability, the amount of damages is meaningless and further proceedings are necessary. Before you can file a bifurcation application, you must have completed at least your Preliminary Information Return and served it on the other party. An opening statement involves giving your spouse a complete list of assets and liabilities, as well as a statement of income and expenses. These documents are essential to divorce proceedings in California because they reveal to each spouse the nature of each spouse`s assets and income. In this way, both spouses should know the full nature and extent of all the property of the marriage. Asking for a fork and having your marital status terminated has little impact on most of your divorce issues.
Terminating your marital status does not mean that your entire divorce case is over. Issues of custody, access, child support, spousal support, and most property division issues continue as if the bifurcation had never occurred. You can continue to exercise your rights in relation to these other matters in your case. If, in your case, a bifurcation request has been made on the issue of marital status, it is important to note some of the effects that a fork may have on you and the other party in your divorce. These effects include: Even if your fork request is granted, you and the other party to the divorce must still comply with the following laws: States have had different views on fork in the past, but most state laws do not address the issue. Alaska allows courts, in certain circumstances, to divide the parties` assets « at any time after the judgment. » Alaska Stat. 25.24.155(b) and Alaska Stat. 25.24.160 (Michie 1996). Michigan Law, Mich. Ct. R. 3.211(B)(3) (1998) provides that a divorce decree must contain a provision relating to the property rights of the parties.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in Frankel v. Frankel, 274 N.J. Super. 585, 644 A.2d 1132 (App. div. 1994), prohibits a range except in the most unusual and extenuating circumstances. Some states exclude a range by law. The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled that all issues must be resolved at the time of dissolution and, in Humphrey v. Humphrey, 214 Neb. 664, 340 N.W.2d 381 (1983), concluded: « The personal convenience which a court can offer to the parties by pronouncing an immediate dissolution while retaining jurisdiction over property may neglect the difficulties and problems to which the trial court subjects litigants, may not be worthy. The Supreme Court of Arizona, in Porter v.
Estate of Pigg, 175 Ariz. 303, 856 P.2d 796 (1993), held that the range of « resolving the issues of dissolution of marriage and distribution of wealth is a mistake » and in Brighton v. Superior Court, 22 Ariz. App. 291, 526 P.2d 1089 (1974), that a range would encourage rather than deter litigation. A Texas Court of Appeals, Adam v. Stewart, 552 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. Civ. App. 1977), disapproved of the fork. The Appeals Division of the Third Department of New York, Busa v.
Busa, 196 A.D.2d 267, 609 N.Y.S.2d 452 (1994), Sullivan v. Sullivan, 174 A.D.2d 862, 571 N.Y.S.2d 154 (1991), and Garcia v. Garcia, 178 A.D.2d 683, 577 N.Y.S.2d 156 (1991), held that a divorce decree is not binding and without legal effect, if it contains a bifurcation and that no equitable distribution is assigned at the time of dissolution, whereas the fourth division, Zack v. Zack, 183 A.D.2d 382, 590 N.Y.S.2d 632 (1992), dismissed these decisions, seconded by Johnson, 172 Misc. 2d 684, 658 N.Y.S.2d 780 (Sup. Ct. 1997).  The fork may be a mutually acceptable option, but if one spouse tries to block the other`s fork request, there are alternatives.
A mediator or arbitrator can help a couple who reach an agreement much faster than a dispute. This usually means less wasted time and less money in legal fees for all parties. There are some issues with the division of ownership that will be affected by the range. These include issues of occupational pensions, health insurance coverage and certain tax liability issues. These issues can be very complex and you should hire a Wallin & Klarich California family law attorney to ensure that your rights are protected in these real estate department matters. If you want to apply for a fork, it`s important to speak to an experienced California divorce attorney who can explain your obligations and help you determine if bifurcation divorce is the best option for you. Therefore, the range must be granted by court order after a hearing. During the hearing, the judge considers both the reasons for the range and how the range might affect both spouses. 5) Under California law and federal tax law, as long as the marital bifurcation ends before the end of the tax year, you can file as a « single » or « head of household » in the same year as the fork. Bifurcation cases contain complex legal issues for all parties involved. If you`re looking to apply for a fork or have received a fork request, it`s important that you have an experienced Orange County bifurcation attorney to guide you through every step of this difficult process.