Plaintiff and Defendant in a divorce? both parties listed as each?

[adrian77]

We were looking at a record and it had the wife listed as the Plaintiff on one case ID and the husband as the defendant and then another case ID (date is only 1 day difference) where the husband is the plaintiff and the wife the defendant. Just wonder which one filed?

[carhill]

Plaintiff or petitioner (my jurisdiction) is the person who filed the court action. The defendant or respondent (my jurisdiction) is the person being sued. While I guess it's technically possible for both parties to file suit, usually the court or judge will sort things out and dismiss/reject one suit. IMO, if the person filing the first suit filed it in correct form, that suit will control. Jurisdictions vary so YMMV. In ours, if contested is anticipated, I'd always shoot for petitioner status. Ours was uncontested so I didn't mind being respondent (we agreed to it for logistical reasons) since it saved us some money on fees, not an insignificant factor in any court action.

[adrian77]

So since there are 2 cases a day a part does that mean they both filed? It has something about child custody and taking a class on it as well?

[katiegrl]

So since there are 2 cases a day a part does that mean they both filed? It has something about child custody and taking a class on it as well?

 

Different cases, different causes of action pertain to each.

 

Both cases are valid.

[SoleMate]

It totally depends on the law of the jurisdiction as to whether there could be 2 family law cases pending simultaneously between the same parties. If cases were filed just 1 day apart, it's possible that the later one will be dismissed at some point.

 

Also, even while a husband and wife have a family law action pending, in some cases there could still be a civil action pending between them as long as it doesn't cover the marital status, child custody, division of property, or other topics reserved for family law. For instance, one of them could sue the other for injuries in a car crash.

[adrian77]

I'm confused though as to why they would both file a day apart though?

[RoseVille]

^^ If they filed a day apart, it sounds like a race to the courthouse. It happens sometimes, especially where there's a lag in entering cases into the case management system.

 

Alternatively, the first is a dissolution petition, the second is a custody petition.

[adrian77]

Guess I'm just nosey. Lol. Just a few months ago she tagged them st a concert together and then all of a sudden they were no longer friends on FB and she deleted all the family pics he was in.

[carhill]

The case summary should delineate the filings of record. Ours started with FL-xxxx (family law) and then went on to delineate the different filings made and clerk/court action on the filings. We had some rejections, primarily in the financial areas, where the court kicked back filings due to improper form or format. In any event, it was interesting to watch it all online. One couldn't view the content of the filings, rather a summary of what was going in in the suit. If two different suits are filed, with different form and cause of action, it's possible both suits could have standing with the court. It's highly unlikely that, using our case as an example, two FL-100's filed a day apart with the same petitioner/respondent mix would both gain standing since, absent some particular motions within, they'd be the same matter at law, the dissolution of a legal marriage.

 

It is kind of fun to look at court records though. I did this when involved with one past MW and found, not only the case summary of their voluminous filings but a particular motion, apparently granted, for compensation for legal fees to the injured party for collection if the other party did not abide by the judgment of the court. I don't know whether or not she acted on it, since her exH apparently supposedly owed her a couple hundred grand plus child support but, hey, it was fun seeing all that stuff online. Great way to verify someone is in fact divorced from who they say they are divorced from.

[RoseVille]

If two different suits are filed, with different form and cause of action, it's possible both suits could have standing with the court. It's highly unlikely that, using our case as an example, two FL-100's filed a day apart with the same petitioner/respondent mix would both gain standing since, absent some particular motions within, they'd be the same matter at law, the dissolution of a legal marriage.

 

That's not an accurate description of the legal term "standing."

 

A lawsuit doesn't have standing. A party does. A party either has a protected right or interest that can be redressed in court, or they don't. Thus, a party either has standing to sue under a particular cause of action, or they don't.

 

Here, assuming the parties are married to each other, both parties have standing to file for dissolution. Who files first doesn't change that, it would merely change who is the original plaintiff/petitioner, versus who is the counter-plaintiff/petitioner.

Edited August 25, 2015 by RoseVille

[jen1447]

Rose, is it accurate to say as well that there could be distinctions in fault divorce states? (e.g., whereas if it's solely a no-fault state, there's no real grievances being brought, just the sought after dissolution, but if it's fault where remedies are sought, both parties could file against each other concurrently?)

[carhill]

Thanks for the clarification of the terms.

 

My lawyer advised me to respond to the filing, or not, rather than incur more filing fees to file a duplicate action because, essentially, the same content could be addressed in a response to the original action.

 

In the sample cases, each party has incurred filing fees (unless they're poor and qualify for a waiver) and each party will be subject to the court's response period for a contested action, whatever that court is (mine is 30 days after proof of service) and that response garners the same filing fees as the original petition. Heh, then there's the lawyers fees for that. Back when we filed, that dual process would have chewed up about 1.6K in filing/response fees alone. I hope the couple in the OP felt it was worth it.

[RoseVille]

Rose, is it accurate to say as well that there could be distinctions in fault divorce states? (e.g., whereas if it's solely a no-fault state, there's no real grievances being brought, just the sought after dissolution, but if it's fault where remedies are sought, both parties could file against each other concurrently?)

 

Still wouldn't result in two separate actions, I don't think. The most likely cause here is simply the race to the courthouse and the lag in electronic filing system, which will ultimately result in the cases being consolidated and the first filer named petitioner/plaintiff and the second-in-time as a counter-P, or two different types of actions (disso, custody, or even domestic violence/request for TRO).

 

Perusing the counties around me (and I have more access than you folks), I see many separate disso/custody/DV actions.

[RoseVille]

Thanks for the clarification of the terms.

 

My lawyer advised me to respond to the filing, or not, rather than incur more filing fees to file a duplicate action because, essentially, the same content could be addressed in a response to the original action.

 

In the sample cases, each party has incurred filing fees (unless they're poor and qualify for a waiver) and each party will be subject to the court's response period for a contested action, whatever that court is (mine is 30 days after proof of service) and that response garners the same filing fees as the original petition. Heh, then there's the lawyers fees for that. Back when we filed, that dual process would have chewed up about 1.6K in filing/response fees alone. I hope the couple in the OP felt it was worth it.

 

Yes, here in CA where you and I are, each new case filed requires each party to pay a first appearance fee. So if you have ever have claims against the party suing you arising out of the same set of facts or circumstances, it wouldn't make sense to file a separate action, as you'd pay fees twice and the cases would end up consolidated anyway.