Once the divorce, either by agreement or court order, becomes final, retirement accounts are often divided by a qualified domestic relations order (commonly called a QDRO) as ordered in the divorce decree. Attorneys must go about drafting the QDRO, getting it approved by the court and the plan, and then have the plan process it. A recent blog by Divorce Law Journal’s Diana L. Skaggs warns about plans charging large fees to process QDROs, and even to approve their own sample forms. Attorney Skaggs’ is right on the money, so to speak, to advise checking with the Summary Plan Description to determine the fees charged by the plan and who the fee is charged to. Allocating the fee in the divorce decree will save headaches later on when the issue pops us.

When a parent paying child support receives social security benefits, whether disability or retirement, those benefits are considered income for the purposes of determining child support. A dependent child of a recipient of social security receives dependent benefits, and the benefits are paid to the custodial parent. These benefits are an integral part of the parent’s social security benefits, as they derive from the parents eligibility for the program and his past contributions into the program.

How are these dependency benefits treated for the purposes of child support? The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled In the Matter of Denise Angley-Cook and John W. Cook that a parent with a child support responsibility is entitled to a dollar for dollar credit for any social security dependency benefits the other parent receives that are derived from their benefits.

Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the support should be calculated as follows:

"the amount of the . . . dependency benefits should be included in the income of the noncustodial parent and the guidelines should then be applied to that amount." Rosenberg, 697 N.E.2d at 991; see also Miller, 890 P.2d at 578. The noncustodial parent is then allowed a credit equal to the amount of the dependency benefits, and the net amount of the noncustodial parent’s support obligation is the difference between the support amount determined by the court to be correct under the guidelines minus the amount of the credit. See Rosenberg, 697 N.E.2d at 991. An exception exists if the support amount determined by the court to be correct under the guidelines is less than the dependency benefits. See id. at 991 n.7 "In such case, the total support obligation is simply equal to the amount of the . . . dependency benefits, and the noncustodial parent would not owe any additional amount." Id.

Basically, the calculation boils down to everyone’s income goes into the pot, and if the child support amount is less then the dependency benefits, there is no child support due from the obligor parent.

 

The New Hampshire Supreme Court released an opinion today In the Matter of Kevin Gendron and Jody Plaistek that held that a voluntary acknowledgement of paternity executed in Massachusetts must be given full faith and credit and that the trial court erred in ordering genetic marker testing. The voluntary acknowledgement of paternity signed by both parents had all ready established the father as the legal father to the child, and therefore there was no need for further proof of paternity to establish parenting rights and responsibilities.

The court noted that it had made similar rulings in Watts v. Watts, which held that a father was precluded from seeking blood tests to disprove his paternity fifteen years after the children’s births. In Watts, the court found that to allow the father to escape liability for support by blood tests would ignore his lengthy, voluntary acknowledgement of paternity. Here, the court noted that although the mother was seeking to disprove paternity, the result should not be any different than that in Watts.

Today’s opinion should serve as a warning to anyone who voluntarily signs an acknowledgement of paternity. If there are any doubts or questions regarding paternity, seek legal counsel prior to signing the acknowledgment  because it may preclude the ability to reopen the issue of paternity in the future.

Alimony, also called maintenance or spousal support, is payments made to a spouse or former spouse under a court order. Alimony in New Hampshire is "rehabilitative’ and is based on the theory that both spouse should be able to provide for their own financial needs. Therefore, when alimony is awarded, it is designed to encourage the supported spouse to establish an independent source of income. However, the New Hampshire Supreme Court has ruled  that this theory is not controlling when the alimony recipient "suffers from ill health and is not capable of establishing an individual source of income, or where the supported spouse in a long-term marriage lacks the requisite job skills to independently approximate the standard of living established during the marriage."

In order to award alimony, the court must find that the supported party lacks sufficient income, property, or both to meet their reasonable needs and be self-supporting and that the paying party can provide for their own reasonable needs and those of the other spouse. The court should also consider the style of living to which the parties have become accustomed during the marriage in determining their reasonable needs.

How much will the court award in alimony? The court relies on several factors to determine the amount of alimony to be awarded, including:

  •  the length of the marriage;
  • the age, health, social or economic status, occupation, amount and sources of income, the property awarded in the divorce decree, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, and needs of each of the parties;
  • the opportunity of each for future acquisition of capital assets and income;
  • the fault of either party;
  • the federal tax consequences of the divorce order. 
  • the economic contribution of each party to the value of their respective estates
  • the non-economic contributions to the family unit.

To read New Hampshire’s law on alimony, click here.

An issue to consider when divorcing is how the divorce will affect your ability to get social security benefits through the other spouses records. These issues can be especially important for older divorcing couples who are counting on social security benefits as part of their retirement plans. It is important to consult with your attorney regarding how the divorce may affect your right to receive social security benefits on your spouses record.

Ora Schwartzberg, a New Hampshire attorney and mediator, posted an e-newsletter titled "The Impact of Divorce on Social Security Survivor Benefits" that explains: 

There are two major types of Social Security benefits: retirement benefits and survivor benefits. In general, a divorced spouse who is eligible for survivor benefits would also be eligible for retirement benefits. Retirement benefits are monthly payments that represent a portion of what your former spouse receives monthly and is paid out while your spouse is still living. Survivor benefits are monthly payments that widows and widowers are entitled to when their spouse dies, assuming that the spouse worked long enough to have earned this benefit under the Social Security system.

In order to qualify for retirement benefits, you must have been married for at least 10 years. You can collect retirement benefits on your former spouse’s Social Security record if you are at least 62 years old and if your former spouse is entitled to or receiving benefits. Generally, if you remarry, you will not be able to collect benefits on your former spouse’s record unless your later marriage ends (whether by death, divorce, or annulment). 

If your divorced spouse dies, you can receive survivor benefits if the marriage lasted 10 years or more. Similar to retirement benefits, you may not be able to collect benefits if you are remarried unless your later marriage ends (whether by death, divorce or annulment). If you are at least 60 years old when you are receiving benefits, the amount of your benefits will not affect the other survivor’s benefits amount.

For more information on social security benefits, check out the Social Security Administration’s on-line help center here.

 

When parties disagree about the parenting rights and responsibilities of each parent, often the court appoints a Guardian Ad Litem. This adds an additional time and cost to a divorce or parenting case. As with attorney fees, the cost of GAL can vary depending on the rate that he charges and the time demanded by the complexity of the case. 

A GAL can be paid through "private pay" or through the "court fund."  When a GAL is paid through a"private pay" case, the court’s order of appointment apportions the payment of the GAL’s retainer. The cost is not always split 50/50, and the division of the fees is reviewable at a final hearing. In New Hampshire, the retainer usually ranges between $1,000 and $1,500. Additionally, the hourly rate varies from $60 to $100 per hour.

When one or both parties cannot afford to pay for the GAL, the court may order the payment of services from the Guardian ad Litem court fund. When a party qualifies to use the court fund, the GAL is paid for her fees through the court’s fund. However, a party is required to contact the New Hampshire Office of Cost Containment to determine their ability to repay the fund for their share of the GAL services in their case.

 

Today the California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage in a 4-3 ruling. The court’s ruling stated that “the legal issue we must resolve is not whether it would be constitutionally permissible under the California Constitution for the state to limit marriage only to opposite-sex couples while denying same-sex couples any opportunity to enter into an official relationship with all or virtually all of the same substantive attributes.” Instead, the question the Court answered was whether the failure to designate the official relationship of same-sex couples as marriage instead of the state recognized domestic partnership violates the California Constitution. The Court found that it did.

The decision and its dissents is 172 pages, so there is a lot to digest. I will post more after I have been able to  read through it in full. In the meantime, to read the opinion yourself, you can find it here. There are also posts through the blogosphere today on the issue, including here at Steven Ballard’s Massachusetts Divorce & Family Law Blog, here at Family Law Prof Blog, and here at Jeffrey Lalloway’s California Divorce and Family Law Blog.