Atlanta Divorce Attorney Blog

A recent article on ABAJournal.com recently reported how one Georgia court is currently wrestling with a tough a question: can a divorce attorney representing a murder defendant’s wife be made to testify in the husband’s criminal trial?

Superior Court Judge Gregory Adams of DeKalb County Superior Court must now rule on the issue after hearing arguments regarding a motion to quash a witness subpoena for the wife’s attorney Esther Panitch. Though any information gathered by Panitch for the purpose of providing legal advice to her client will remain confidential due to attorney-client privilege, the defense counsel argues Panitch possesses material information separate from her representation of the wife.

Precisely what that information is has yet to be revealed by the defense. The defense counsel said that he anticipates “calling her as a witness… because we think she has independent facts that may be important in the case,” adding: “There is a legitimate basis for this subpoena, and I want to hold out the possibility that we may need to call her.”

Panitch originally served as divorce attorney and now acts as an advisor to the wife, Ariela Neuman, for the murder trial of her husband, Hemy Zvi Neuman.

Her attorney and business partner, James R. Hodes, argued that Panitch does not have any relevant evidence concerning the murder case of her client’s husband and argued that subpoenaing her as a witness interferes with her ability to counsel her client effectively.

The case, currently in the middle of trial, revolves around a murder allegedly committed by Henry Neuman, a father of three, who is accused of killing Rusty Sneiderman on November 18, 2011, after Sneiderman dropped off his 2-year-old at Dunwoody Prep Pre-School. Investigators believe Neuman and Sneiderman’s wife may have been having an affair.

By Connor Alexander, Law Clerk, Meriwether & Tharp, LLC

Georgia divorce attorneys are often asked whether a party will remain responsible for an ex-spouse’s personal medical debt after the divorce is final. There are two answers to this question. First, if the party signed a document with the medical provider agreeing to pay part of the bill, then yes, that party could still be liable after the divorce.

The second answer depends on what is in the divorce settlement agreement about debts listed and not listed. Many settlement agreements state that a party is solely liable for debts incurred by that party. However, if the medical provider sues you for the debt, and the settlement agreement lists your ex-spouse as being responsible for it, then you must file a third party lawsuit against your ex-spouse to pull him/her into the lawsuit as well. If your settlement agreement is clear enough, you may also want to file a contempt action against your ex-spouse for failing to pay the debt according to the settlement agreement.

By Patrick L. Meriwether, Partner, Meriwether & Tharp, LLC

In Georgia, child support payments are calculated to cover all the minor children in a household. However, when an older child reaches 18 years of age (aka “ages out”), the child support obligation changes to reflect the fewer number of minor children in the household. In a case that has been fully resolved, filing a Modification of Child Support is usually necessary to adjust the child support figure. For those currently going through a divorce and expecting their oldest child to age out in just a few months or years, can the parties agree for an automatic adjustment of child support to occur when the oldest child ages out? How do Judges in Georgia perceive such automatic adjustments in Settlement Agreements?

At a conference for matrimonial lawyers held by the Georgia State Bar, a few Judges responded to this exact question. All of the Judges on this panel, including a Judge from Cobb County, Fulton County, and Gwinnett County, all indicated that they would allow the automatic adjustments only if the change was foreseeable. For these Judges, this meant that the oldest child would age out within a matter of 6-8 months. If not within this time frame, these Judges all indicated that they would be unlikely to accept automatic adjustments and that filing a Modification of Child Support would be the proper procedure.

By Emily Yu, Associate Attorney, Meriwether & Tharp, LLC

The Georgia Court of Appeals recently affirmed the grant of a petition for legitimation over the mother’s appeal. Murray v. Hooks, A11A1824 (2012). In that case, the father filed a petition for legitimation and was awarded temporary custody due to the mother’s incarceration. Id. at 1-2. A few months later, after a hearing that the mother failed to attend, the trial court entered a final order of legitimation and awarded custody to the father. Id. The trial court subsequently granted the mother’s motion to vacate the final order and scheduled a bench trial in the case. Both parties appeared at the trial where the trial court awarded joint legal custody, with primary custody to the father and visitation to the mother. Id.

The mother appealed, alleging “the trial court erred in its custody award and violated her due process rights by failing to provide her an adequate opportunity to be heard.” Id. at 1. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed, noting that the mother received adequate notice of the trial and the trial court’s final order indicated that she attended the trial. Id. at 3. Though there was no transcript included in the record, the Court noted that“[i]n the absence of a transcript, we must assume the trial court’s findings were supported by evidence presented, and the actions taken by the trial court during the hearing were appropriate.” Id. at 3, citations and punctuation omitted. The Court further pointed out that there were no due process violations based on the court’s prior hearings held in the mother’s absence because the original final order was vacated and the temporary order was replaced by the order coming from the trial, which she did attend. Id. at 3-4.

Extra-marital relationships that are occur during your divorce proceedings can have a huge impact on your divorce case in Georgia. I recently read a book called the Five Love Languages by Dr. Gary Chapman. Whether you are married, single, trying to figure out how to save your marriage, or figuring out why you are getting divorced, this is a highly recommended book that discusses the different ways people perceive and feel love as well as the different ways that people express love to their significant other (or future significant others as the case may be). Dr. Chapman discusses the “in love” feeling that couples experience. The “in love” period is one in which your significant other can do no wrong and one in which every day and every action revolves around your significant other. Decisions are made to best allow you and your significant other to be together. Waiting to see your significant other again can feel like an eternity. Many of us remember this feeling and can relate to the feeling and belief that “our love is unstoppable!”

As an Atlanta Divorce Attorney, I want to discuss this “in love” feeling you may have for someone other than your soon-to-be-ex. Clients who have found themselves in an extramarital relationship or very much looking forward to engaging in one will often hear our Atlanta Divorce Attorneys recommend that they not date until the divorce is final. We advise our clients this way for a number of reasons in addition to the obvious moral implications.

First, engaging in an extramarital relationship can have an adverse impact on your impending divorce case. If you are a spouse seeking alimony, adultery can bar your claim for alimony. Additionally, it can sometimes effect equitable division.

Second, we recommend that clients do not make decisions pertaining to your divorce while in the “in love” period. Too often clients feel so overly confident about their new relationship that they forget to think about the possibility that the new relationship may not last. The decisions made at this time tend to assume that the new significant other will be around to provide in the event that something does not go as planned in their divorce. For example, clients may not seek as much alimony thinking that they will marry their new significant other and will not need the alimony. Clients may also walk away from more of the marital estate than they should have to simply get the divorce over as quickly as possible so they can re-marry their new love. It is important not to let the “in-love” feeling cloud your judgment during the pendency of your divorce case.

Third, the difference between a less expensive divorce and a very expensive divorce tends to boil down to one thing: emotion. Infidelity, the idea of infidelity, even the possibility or appearance of infidelity is often enough to turn a relatively inexpensive divorce into a very expensive, highly contested case.

My last bit of advice is for this upcoming Valentine’s Day, please be mindful of these issues and use common sense when deciding whether to go out to dinner, send flowers, or send gifts to a new significant other if you are still married. Credit card statements and bank account statements can be subpoenaed. It is possible that you are being taped, recorded, or otherwise followed by a Private Investigator. If you have a new significant other and are currently in the middle of a divorce case, this Atlanta Divorce Attorney recommends that the celebration of your new love wait until after a Judge has signed your Final Judgment and Decree of Divorce!

By Emily Yu, Associate Attorney, Meriwether & Tharp, LLC

A temporary protective order can be issued against someone who does not live in Georgia. O.C.G.A. §19-13-2 gives the superior courts of Georgia jurisdiction over a nonresident charged with a commission of an act of family violence. Georgia will only have jurisdiction over the nonresident if he or she, either in person or through an agent, commits a tortuous injury in Georgia caused by an act or omission outside Georgia and the nonresident does one of the following things:

• Regularly does or solicits business in Georgia; or
• Engages in any other persistent course of conduct in the state of Georgia; or
• Derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or from services rendered in Georgia.

However, if the act of family violence is the placing of harassing or intimidating telephone calls or text messages to a person in Georgia, this is not enough to give Georgia jurisdiction. The act of family violence is considered to have occurred in the State where the telephone call was placed or from where the text message was sent. If phone calls or text messages from someone out of State are the only acts of family violence, Georgia may not have jurisdiction over the Respondent.

By Emily Yu, Associate Attorney, Meriwether & Tharp, LLC

The Supreme Court of Georgia recently heard a case addressing the issue of retroactive alimony modification in Georgia. Branham v. Branham, S11A1896 (2012). In that case, under their divorce decree, the husband was required to pay periodic alimony to the wife for 120 months “unless and until Wife dies, remarries, or cohabitates with someone else in a meretricious relationship,” and the wife was required to pay the monthly mortgage on the marital home that she was awarded. Id. Both parties quickly fell behind on these obligations. Id. The husband filed a contempt action against the wife for failing to pay the mortgage and also filed a separate action to cease his alimony obligation, alleging that the wife was cohabitating with someone in a meretricious relationship. Id. The wife subsequently filed a contempt action against the husband for his failure to pay alimony. Id. The trial court heard all three actions together and found both parties in contempt. Id. at 2. In addition, the trial court denied the husband’s motion to cease his alimony obligation, but reduced his obligation for past due alimony to zero. Id.

The wife appealed, contending that the trial court erred by retroactively reducing the husband’s alimony obligation and the Supreme Court of Georgia agreed. Id. The Court quoting long standing Georgia law in its holding: “Retroactive modification of an alimony obligation would vitiate the finality of the judgment obtained as to each past due installment…[A] judgment modifying an alimony obligation is effective no earlier than the date of the judgment.” Id. at 2-3, quoting Hendrix v. Stone, 261 Ga. 874, 875 (1992). In this case, the ruling that husband’s alimony arrearage be extinguished clearly violates this rule, as it modifies a past obligation (i.e. one that had already come due). Thus, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the ruling.

Georgia family law attorneys often deal with post-divorce custody issues. For example, sometimes, unfortunately, a parent refuses to return a child at the end of his/her visitation time. In this situation in Georgia, if the parties have been divorced in the past 3 years, there should be a Parenting Plan in place that sets forth each parent’s respective custodial times. If a parent has violated the terms of that Parenting Plan, the other parent can call the police to see if they will help enforce the Parenting Plan. If the police decline to get involved, the parent will have to file a Petition for Contempt with the Court that granted the divorce or in the county of the other parent’s residence.

If the divorce was granted more than three years ago, there should be a settlement agreement or Order from the Court setting forth each parent’s respective parenting times. In that situation, the course of action would be the same as above.

By Patrick L. Meriwether, Partner, Meriwether & Tharp, LLC

The Supreme Court of Georgia recently heard an interesting case regarding visitation rights for grandparents whose son’s parental rights had been terminated. Kunz v. Bailey, S11G0867 (2012). In that case, the child’s stepfather adopted the child after the biological father’s rights were terminated. Id. After being denied access to the child, the paternal grandparents (parents of the biological father whose rights were terminated), petitioned for visitation rights with the child. Id. Under Georgia law, a petition for grandparent visitation is not authorized where “the parents of the minor child are not separated and the child is living with both of the parents.” OCGA §19-7-3(b). Therefore, the child’s mother and adoptive father (“Parents”) moved to dismiss the action and, after the motion was denied, filed a direct appeal to the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Id. at 2. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s denial of the Parents’ motion to dismiss, determining that the term “parent” in the grandparent visitation statute “was not limited to natural parents, but included adoptive parents as well.” Id.

The grandparents then filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court of Georgia to determine whether the language of the grandparent visitation statute cited above includes adoptive parents. Id. at 3. The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the statute did include adoptive parents. Any other interpretation would “allow grandparents, by court action, to intrude upon the ‘constitutionally protected interest of parents to raise their children.'” Id. at 4, quoting Brooks v. Parkerson, 265 Ga. 189, 191 (1995). In addition, there was no limiting language in the statute that distinguished between any class of parents. Kunz, at 4.

The Court also agreed that the trial court’s denial of the original motion to dismiss was error. Since the adoptive father was the father of the child at the time the grandparent visitation was filed and the child was living with both parents, there was no basis for an original action for visitation by the grandparents. Id. at 5. Thus, dismissal of the grandparents’ visitation petition “was the proper outcome.” Id.