In February, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled on a case I filed. The ruling addressed two issues: The calculation of a military pension; and use of the child tax exemption. The Court refused to rule on the child tax exemption issue due to lack of preservation and invited error. The opinion has an interesting discussion of those two issues. The Court did agree with me that the highest pay grade should be used to calculated the division of a military pension regardless of the date of divorce. The opinion can be read here: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A146655.pdf
I love my work as a divorce and custody lawyer. I get funny looks saying this sometimes, but it’s true. The reason I chose this challenging work is a basic desire to help people. One of the biggest satisfactions I get is really helping people who are at a disadvantage in court. Most divorce cases settle within the range of what is fair. Most people take good advice from good lawyers. However, some people misuse the court system to try to increase costs, make the case unpleasant and difficult for everyone involved, and pressure the opponent into an unfair settlement.
Last year I represented a client who was in a much worse financial position than his spouse. He had limited access to money, and was kicked out of the home he had lived in for years. The other party was difficult, obstructionist, intentionally increased his legal costs, took positions not supported by Oregon divorce law, filed false criminal and civil charges against my client in an effort to get him to “go away” and settle for nothing, and at least doubled what my client’s bill should have been. Her hope was that his resources would be exhausted, his lawyer would quit, and he would give up and go away with an unfair result. We gave his wife multiple chances to settle for what was fair, all of which were rejected.
The case should have settled, but the other party’s position made it impossible to settle. I took the case before the judge standing by my client’s side. I exceeded his goals, and far exceeded what he would have received had he taken one of his’ ex’s “offers.” I had a lot of personal satisfaction in helping him persevere and getting a good result from the court.
This week, the trial court let us know that the other party had to pay $25,000 of my client’s legal bill because of her conduct during the case. It’s money he shouldn’t have had to spend, and I am happy to be a part of leveling the playing field for my client, and putting him in a better financial position. I feel fortunate to be in a position to help people like him persevere, not give up, get a good result, and get vindication at the end for the other side’s bad behavior. Cases like this are one of the reasons I love what I do.
By Sean Stephens
Oregon Supreme Court family law cases are few and far between. Props to our lawyer Dan Margolin for having review granted on a case of first impression. The attached video is Dan’s oral argument at the Oregon Supreme Court on Lisa Matar and Azzam Harake (S060064)(A143331)
The issue on review is “Are agreements not to seek modification of a child support award enforceable or do they violate public policy.”
A link to the video of the argument is here.
Dan Margolin, Partner at Stephens Margolin PC was quoted on August 15th 2012 in the Portland Tribune article titled “You know you’re an Oregonian when..” regarding Oregon’s divorce residency requirement.
The short answer is “”NO!”As a divorce lawyer based in Portland, Oregon, I hear this question all too frequently. It is always a bad idea during a divorce case. The other related situation situation is where a potential client arrives in the office with a printed stack of intercepted or hacked emails and wants you to read them. It is a very bad idea to intercept your spouses communications with the thought you will be able to use them in your divorce. You are potentially violating the federal Wiretap Act, and Oregon has made intercepting wire or verbal communications where you are not a party a Class A Misdemeanor. (ORS 165.543)
In other states, money damages have been awarded against the injured party in a divorce case where communications were monitored and misused. In Klumb v. Goan, 09-cv-115 (E.D. Tenn.; July 19, 2012), a Tennessee court awarded $10,000 in damages against Klumb for, in part, intercepting and then altering her husband’s emails in an effort to gain advantage in the divorce property division.
Other Popular Articles and links from the Oregon Divorce Blog
- Top 10 questions to ask a divorce lawyer in the first consultation.
- At what age can a child decide custody/parenting time?
- Contempt Of Court for Parenting Time Violations