As I am enjoying the sunny skies, crashing waves, and the people it reminds me that you need sunscreen.
Like sunscreen, sometimes you need an attorney. They can be kind of a hassle to deal with and even could be messy, but is protection from a later and potentially bigger problem.
Matthew Thompson is a family law attorney in Mississippi and reminds you to wear your sunscreen & call your divorce attorney.
Matthew Thompson is a Mississippi family law attorney and professor, and having difficult, drawn-out and costly divorces would be good for his pocketbook.
But Thompson supports reform and changes to divorce laws, “even though it’s against my own self interests.”
“The current laws make it expensive, and in some instances, impossible to get a divorce,” said Thompson, whose firm focuses on family law statewide and who is a professor teaching domestic relations at Mississippi College’s law school.
Thompson said the Legislature’s recent divorce law reform, removing a corroboration requirement for abused spouses, is a needed change.
“Our law has required cruelty claims be corroborated with evidence beyond that of the victim’s testimony,” Thompson said. “… Even if the court believed you, you had to have a neighbor, family member, police report or picture, or you didn’t have corroboration … Now, if the court finds the victim truthful and credible, the court can accept that. If you take a step back and think, that makes sense. Our judges have always been the lie detector, always the barometer of whether someone was credible.
“There is some form of abuse in a vast number of divorce cases,” Thompson said. “Not every one, but a lot of them. When you drill down and include physical, mental, emotional, verbal abuse — It’s a significant number of cases. We as human beings treat the people we are supposed to love the most the worst.”
Thompson said he supports Mississippi creating a “no-fault” ground for divorce. South Dakota is the only other state without such a ground. He said opposition to this change, from those saying it will weaken the sanctity of marriage and increase divorces, is misguided. In practice, Mississippi’s lack of a no-fault ground allows one spouse to hold up a divorce, sometimes for years.
“The idea behind making it difficult to get a divorce is that Mississippi is promoting marriage,” Thompson said. “But when you go 10 years and it costs tens of thousands of dollars — those aren’t intact families trying to get back together.
“Our law promotes divorce blackmail,” Thompson said. “… You have to pay what I say, or agree to what I want, or I won’t agree to a divorce … You have a fundamental, constitutional right to marriage, according to (a U.S. Supreme Court ruling). Shouldn’t you have a fundamental right to a divorce? I guess the counter to that is that you don’t have to get married.”
Thompson said some of the moral and religious arguments focused on divorce policies should be focused on the front-end, marriage policies.
“Our state has made it phenomenally easy to get into a marriage,” Thompson said. “There used to be a three-day wait, used to be a blood test requirement. But now you just go to the circuit clerk and pay $25.
“Studies show having mom and dad happily married and living together is what’s best for children and families,” Thompson said. “Having mom and dad get along and living separately would be second best. Mom and dad living together and fighting and being miserable, whether it’s violent or just cold war, that’s not the best. If this is really about protecting families, there are ways to do that, but still have an appropriate and reasonable means to get out of a marriage. It shouldn’t take a beating or physical violence to get there.”
Contact Geoff Pender at 601-961-7266 or gpender@gannett.com. Follow him on Twitter.
Matthew Thompson www.BowTieLawyer.ms (601) 850-8000
It’s an expression from the gambling world, but holds true in family law too.
Overplaying your hand is when you think you have the advantage, but do to whatever reason you don’t. Sometimes it’s because an important piece of information was not disclosed, or perhaps overlooked, or because the opponent has the ability to make a situation appear to be something that it is not.
For instance, it’s common in custody disputes for one side to want full custody and the other to want joint. The side that wants joint describes each side’s parenting as basically 50/50 and, of course, there is no need for child support. The side that wants full custody describes the parenting as more 80/20 and seeks support. The full custody parent can also back up their claims. They know the teachers, doctors, children’s schedules, and have done the primary care-giving. The side that wanted joint, well their job did not allow them to really do joint, but the 20% of the time they were around, they did 50% of the parenting. That would have been nice to know on the front end.
The bottom line is to be sure to tell your lawyer everything. If you do, you can be protected as much as possible. If you don’t, they may call your bluff and you could be up the river.
Matthew Thompson is a Divorce attorney in Mississippi and warns you that sometimes calling the person who is overplaying their hand can backfire on you. So be careful either way.
It seems our “lives” are lived on FaceBook, for better and for worse.
A short marriage came to an abrupt end when the parties realized that they did not really know each other. It was not a first marriage for either party, a whirlwind courtship and a tumultuous coupling that lead to separation after 9 months.
The husband sought an easy “no-fault” divorce. She would keep hers plus he pays her some starting over money, he keep his and they go their separate ways. She did not respond.
Well, she actually hired a lawyer and sued him for everything; a fault based divorce, 1/2 of the house, 1/2 of his retirement, that he buy her a car, permanent alimony, plus she retains all of her stuff. Again, all of this based on a 9 month marriage. It’s important to note that he had the house prior to marriage, the bulk of the retirement prior to marriage and the car was a lease that was to be turned in.
She was aggressive to a fault. She sought a temporary hearing and asked for temporary alimony. She didn’t get it. We then went through the discovery process. We sought records, arrest and otherwise.
Finally, a break through…she posted on FaceBook that she was engaged! To her Soulmate!
I sent her lawyer a note. It said “Great news! I hear congratulations are in order. Your client has announced her engagement. Attached are the pictures she posted, plus a pic of an impressive engagement ring…it’s high time this case settle. Attached is our proposal to settle all issues. Please review, sign where indicated and return to me. In the event this does not resolve this matter we will be filing an Amended Answer and Counterclaim consistent with these revelations.“
The case settled that day via an easy “no-fault” divorce. She kept hers plus he paid her some starting over money, he kept his and they went their separate ways.
Matthew Thompson is a Mississippi Divorce Attorney and is equally grateful and frustrated that FaceBook exists.
Last week a firestorm erupted when Representative Andy Gipson single-handedly killed two bills seeking to modify divorce law. The first sought to allow for an additional ground for divorce if a spouse committed domestic violence, and the second would have added a ground based on two years of actual separation. Both died in Gipson’s committee without being considered. The ensuing firestorm placed Mississippi in the local, state and national spotlight for all of the wrong reasons.
However, it seems that Gipson has had a change of heart. This term, “change of heart,” was quoted from an interview Gipson had with the Clarion Ledger shortly after he killed the original domestic violence as a ground Bill, “[I]f someone has committed violence or assault, they need to have their behavior corrected, they need to have a change of heart.”
You may peruse the proposed amended Bill language here. In summary it seeks to clarify existing law and specifically add that the following conduct and burden of proof is included in the Cruelty analysis:
(a) Abusive Physical Conduct. A divorce …may be decreed to the injured party where one or more incidents of the following abusive physical conduct is established through the reliable testimony of one or more credible witnesses, any of whom may be the injured party: (i) that the injured party’s spouse attempted to cause, or purposely, knowingly or recklessly caused bodily injury to the injured party; or (ii) that the injured party’s spouse attempted by physical menace to put the injured party in fear of imminent serious bodily harm.
(b) Abusive Non-Physical Conduct. In addition to the foregoing subsection, a divorce …may also be decreed to the injured party where a pattern of abusive non-physical conduct of any one or more of the following is established through the reliable testimony of one or more credible witnesses, any of whom may be the injured party:
that the injured party’s spouse engaged in a pattern against the injured party of (i) threats and/or intimidation, (ii) emotional and/or verbal abuse, (iii) forced isolation, (iv) sexual extortion and/or sexual abuse, (v) stalking and/or aggravated stalking as defined in Section 97-3-107, and/or (vi) economic or financial abuse; provided that any such established pattern of the foregoing shall be shocking to the conscience of a reasonable person.
(2)Standard of Proof. For purposes of subsection (1) of this section, the standard of proof shall be: (a) Clear and convincing evidence when there is only the reliable testimony of a single credible witness, which may be the injured party presented to the court; or (b) Preponderance of the evidence when the reliable testimony of a single credible witness, which may be the injured party, is corroborated by other credible physical or forensic evidence presented to the court. – Senate Bill 2680 as amended by the House, March 6, 2017
This is a good change. It goes further than the original proposed bill. It addresses one of the biggest obstacles in obtaining a divorce on Cruelty, which is the corroboration requirement. Prior to this Bill the complaining party had to have a witness or such other corroboration of physical abuse, in addition to their own testimony. The problem with that is that in domestic violence situations it is routinely behind closed doors, in secret and it is all too common for the abused to not tell anyone. Routinely the abused does not seek help, either medical or otherwise, due to fear, shame, guilt and threats of it happening again.
This bill also defines forms of non-physical abuse to include threats, intimidation, emotional, verbal, economic and financial abuses. These are all forms of abuse and should be included and should provide for the means to end a marriage if the spouse is doing these things to harm the other spouse.
It is an interesting process watching law be made. Gipson, who last week was the goat is now all about the gloat, with him stating that the real problem all along was the Judges. The Judges that do not apply the law uniformly and what is a fault ground in one Court, is not in another. Perhaps, the ends justify the means in getting to the desired outcome. The above divorce language was added to a Bill that had previously passed the Senate that dealt with Abused and Neglected Children, clarifying relative care.
Any change that seeks to make Mississippi divorce law more consistent and more common sense is a good thing. Complaining about the process may seem petty, but it was you, the concerned citizens, that got Gipson’s attention and made this happen. I received one piece of “hatemail” due to my prior blog. He essentially took me to task for complaining, but not doing anything. However, it seems that the old adage may still be true. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Matthew Thompson is a Mississippi Divorce Attorney and is pleased when the Mississippi Legislature gets one right, regardless of how they got there. Here’s to a Change of Hearts!
D is for Divorce. It is a dreaded and unpleasant word. It is drastic. It is serious.
Divorce should never be taken lightly. It should not be cast around as if it is something less than a nuclear option. A cavalier attitude can lead to monumental consequences.
Threatening divorce could even contribute towards having grounds for divorce in the form of emotional or verbal abuse. So, what do you do if your spouse threatens divorce?
With divorce being a part of marriage and life there is no good reason not to be educated about the process.
Matthew Thompson is a Divorce attorney in Mississippi and cautions you not to say “divorce” if you don’t mean it.
FaceBook is ubiquitous. It is virtually everywhere.
However, it is NOT for airing your grievances with your significant other. It is NOT where you post how awful the other parent is/was/will be. It is NOT where you share embarrassing pictures, screen grabs of texts, or generally blast the other person.
So, you may ask, where do I get to do those things? Court, maybe. Or, maybe you don’t do those things.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law Attorney in Mississippi and cringes when he sees this junk on FB and maybe smirks.
Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms (601) 850-8000 www.BowTieLawyer.ms
(601) 850-8000 - - BowTieLawyer.MS 