Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Prior to this, people used such issues as incompatibility or a decline in lucidity as grounds; the court eventually came to see these problems as not severe enough to warrant divorce, however. [10] In the 1970s, no-fault grounds gained favor in many states, [ 10 ] and in 2010, New York became one of the last of the fifty states to allow no ...
Divorce courts retain the discretion to refuse to enforce prenuptial agreement terms restricting a party’s right to seek alimony if that party would have to seek public assistance as a result of the alimony waiver, or if the restriction on the right to seek alimony is unconscionable or unfair when the divorce occurs.
The most common forms of quasi-legal divorce are the Islamic forms of divorce known as the talaq and its less well-regulated version of triple talaq, and the form of divorce in Judaism known as the get which is regulated by the Beth Din. [2] Unlike the talaq, the process to obtain a get must occur at a specific place and with specified documents.
The court's code of conduct says a justice ordinarily has a duty to take part in cases since justices, unlike lower-court judges, can't be replaced when there's a conflict.
Judicial disqualification laws existed in Roman law and early Jewish law, which disqualified judges from serving on cases of family, friends or enemies. [1]Civil law countries still have significant disqualification privileges, whereas common law countries, such as England, went in a different direction where recusal was required less often. [1]
Divorce can be contentious, especially when money issues get in the way. If your former spouse tries to prevent you from claiming their Social Security benefits out of spite, it can put you in a ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
In most jurisdictions including in federal courts, both the witness-spouse and the accused-spouse have the spousal communications privilege, so either may invoke it to prevent the witness-spouse from testifying about a confidential communication made during the marriage even if neither spouse is a party in the trial. [4]