Info needed on CA divorce process

[Ruapehu1]

I have a friend who lives in CA (really, it's not me ) and is trying to get divorced. She's been separated from her husband for 5+ years and they've been to court at least once (I live outside the US, so I don't have all the details). She says that every time it comes before a judge, the husband says he's "not ready" and they give him an extension. This has cost her $10k in legal fees already.

 

I just can't believe that in this day and age, in a civilised jurisdiction like CA, it's impossible to get a divorce unless her husband agrees! Surely there comes a time when the judge says "Too bad buddy, you've procrastinated long enough, here's what's gonna happen".

 

(I wonder if perhaps there are assets on his side that she's not willing to walk away from?)

 

But anyway, what I'm asking for here is help in finding some low-cost (or preferably free) legal resource center in the Sacramento area where my friend can go and get things moving, or at least get some advice on how to do that. She's living on rice and lentils and doesn't have money for more legal fees and with holding down two jobs, she doesn't have time to research this herself.

 

In case it matters, she used to have school age kids, but they are both adults now.

 

Can some kind soul please help me to help her? It's really hard for me to get any information, not being in the state. There must be free/lowcost places in CA that can help women get free of dead weight husbands.

[Popsicle]

Yes there are either assets or debts that will hold a divorce up. If the parties don't agree, it can remain in the balance indefinitely. A low cost lawyer could keep forcing court dates. Google "legal aid of Sacramento". She will have to qualify based on low income though.

[PegNosePete]

I just can't believe that in this day and age, in a civilised jurisdiction like CA, it's impossible to get a divorce unless her husband agrees!

You are completely right to disbelieve that. It is quite possible to get a divorce if you want one, whether your spouse agrees or not. And it certainly doesn't take 5 years or cost $10k either.

 

Surely there comes a time when the judge says "Too bad buddy, you've procrastinated long enough, here's what's gonna happen".

A judge doesn't make that kind of decision. A judge applies the law. If a person has filed all the correct paperwork then the judge will grant the divorce. If they haven't, then he won't.

 

It sounds as though your friend has either made a huge catalogue of mistakes, got into a huge mess of incorrect paperwork, compounded those mistakes with other mistakes, and has a schmuck of lawyer who has tried to correct all the mistakes but just made it worse. That's the only way I can see someone spending $10k and taking 5 years but still not being divorced.

 

There must be free/lowcost places in CA that can help women get free of dead weight husbands.

Personally I believe you're not getting the full story here. I don't think your friend actually wants practical help. If she did then she would have used google, yellow pages, local library, etc to find assistance and she would be divorced by now. It's pretty inconceivable that someone could spend $10k and 5 years, yet not have the time to find a decent lawyer, and somehow you giving her a name and address will mysteriously solve all her problems. It's just not gonna happen. I think you should leave her to it. Be her friend but tell her you can't help her out with this (if she won't help herself).

[carhill]

Sacramento County Family Court Self-Help division:

 

https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/family/self-help-center.aspx

 

Child support services:

 

Home, Department of Child Support Services

 

California Bar Association:

 

The State Bar of California Home Page

 

 

It costs about 400 bucks at the clerk of the court to file and serve a divorce lawsuit and a similar amount to respond. If she's got '10K' in legal costs, humans outside the courthouse proper have been involved, hence why I included the bar association so she could file complaints against any humans licensed by the state to practice law.

 

The only way to deal with legal people, and spouses who won't get of center, is to make a lot of trouble for them. They both think they own the process, and you, and finding their weak spots will wipe that smug superiority off their face. Research judges. Find out their weak spots. Which ones despise deadbeat or combative fathers and husbands. Life is war. Sorry for your friend's problems but she's got a lot of company in this state.

 

I included the child support services because of the minor children when the divorce was apparently filed. They may be helpful. May not but it's a stone worth turning over. They have lawyers who are paid by the taxpayer. If your friend ever applied for help regarding the children during this, and I hope she did, they'll have an interest. I'm mentioning this because of the lentils and rice comment.

 

Caution: The last time we filed a bar association complaint, the review lead time was 18-24 months. Still, sending a copy of it certified mail to the lawyer was worth it.

 

Good luck and I think, procedure-wise, the family court self-help division can get her on-track. They assist with filings and refer to low or no cost legal and mediation assistance.

[Ruapehu1]

I can't thank you all enough for responding. I have been feeling so useless about this! I will send her a link to this thread since there is so much excellent info in it I wouldn't do it justice by summarising it.

 

One further question: she needs to sell or refinance the house, to release some equity so she can pay off some loans. Is this possible without the worse-than-useless husband's agreement? Surely if she paid him half of the equity released that would be fair? Then she could use her half to pay off the loans.

 

Many, many thanks again all of you!

[carhill]

If he's on the mortgage and deed, that'll need to be dealt with and lenders are usually a bit jittery about lending on homes involved in lawsuits. However it is done and a good loan broker can help. However, she'll, at minimum, need to qualify financially for whatever she's borrowing on her own. She might be able to secure private or in-house money with a co-borrower not her spouse but IDK if that'll fly with a Freddie or Fannie lender who packages per the federal programs.

 

Usually, the court orders the house sold and the proceeds divided up somehow, unless the parties agree differently and the agreement passes court muster.

 

Who's paying the mortgage right now?

[Ruapehu1]

I don't know who's paying the mortgage, but he's such a deadbeat I'd bet it's her. Your post raises an interesting idea: could the court order the house to be sold, without the rest of the assets and liabilities having to be agreed over? Again, this would probably have to be done without the husband's agreement (he's using his procrastination over the divorce process to control her). Is that possible?

 

Sorry to keep coming back at you, but these loans are causing real problems for her and I know she'd love to get them paid off.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Ruapehu1

[carhill]

Bankruptcy is always an option. My lawyer put together a BK plan in case I needed it. Fortunately I didn't. I do know one lady whom I knew well enough to see their actual divorce filings who did use the option when faced with a problem husband and a long divorce. She filed BK and went on public assistance and got money for her kids from the state. Poor? Nah, they had two very profitable ranches and one disagreeable ranch operator. Theirs took nearly seven years and he still stiffed her on the judgment. What? Yeah, the court orders stuff but it's up to the parties to do it. One or the other can still balk, then the damaged party gets to, yup, go back to court to enforce the judgment.

 

I did a bit of an end run, getting into a firm on an estate matter for a low retainer and, once on monthly billing on that deal, including court time, I tickled one of their divorce attorneys for some help and got billed on the per hour with no retainer. That kind of stuff is discretionary and depends on the firm. IMO, the family law division is still her first and best stop. Start at the beginning.

[Ruapehu1]

Thanks...she's already done bankruptcy, did that about 3 or 4 years ago now. I'm glad it worked out well for you And thanks again.

[PegNosePete]

I don't know who's paying the mortgage, but he's such a deadbeat I'd bet it's her.

Apologies if this is a wrong assumption but they've been separated for 5 years so I assume he's living elsewhere, and that she's still living in the house. It's very common and fair to most reasonable people (and courts) that if she's able, she should pay the whole mortgage for a house for which she enjoys sole occupancy. Why should he keep paying for a house he can't even enter? You can look at it like she's renting "his half" of the house from him, by paying "his half" of the mortgage.

 

could the court order the house to be sold, without the rest of the assets and liabilities having to be agreed over?

No, the court makes one final and formal ruling which settles all assets of the marriage.

 

Imagine what could happen otherwise. Say the house is sold and split 50/50, with the expectation that the savings account will also be split 50/50 later. But the husband then goes to Vegas and spends all the savings and his 50% of the house money, leaving him with nothing. The wife would then be unable to get her half of the savings account because it no longer exists. But if it's all settled at once, if the husband were to go to Vegas and spend the savings pot, the judge could then say "the husband has decimated marital assets therefore i am awarding the wife 90% of the house equity to compensate".

[Ruapehu1]

No, the court makes one final and formal ruling which settles all assets of the marriage.

 

Imagine what could happen otherwise. Say the house is sold and split 50/50, with the expectation that the savings account will also be split 50/50 later. But the husband then goes to Vegas and spends all the savings and his 50% of the house money, leaving him with nothing. The wife would then be unable to get her half of the savings account because it no longer exists. But if it's all settled at once, if the husband were to go to Vegas and spend the savings pot, the judge could then say "the husband has decimated marital assets therefore i am awarding the wife 90% of the house equity to compensate".

 

Yes, I see your point. The reason I asked is that my husband and his first wife did their settlement in stages. It also took a very long time, and he and I had met and were living together before it was finished. I was afraid that if he died, she would turf me out since she blamed me for them not getting back together. So, he bought out her half of the house and they settled the rest of it a couple of years later. I know that's different from what I was thinking about for my friend, but I wondered if my idea was feasible anyway. Thanks for the clear explanation.

[PegNosePete]

he bought out her half of the house and they settled the rest of it a couple of years later. I know that's different from what I was thinking about for my friend, but I wondered if my idea was feasible anyway.

It is feasible if both parties agree to it. Whether it's advisable or not is another matter, for the reasons I mentioned above

 

A court would never make rulings in stages but if both parties trust each other not to go to Vegas and blow the marital assets then it can be done informally (although it would make sense to formalise it after it's all finished to remove any future claims).