Many people including some attorneys don’t understand the position surrounding the engagement. The engagement is merely an agreement between a man and a woman who are both free to marry each other that they will marry each other at some time in the future.
This there must be a proper agreement, capacity to enter into an agreement and where assistance is required in law, that the necessary consent has been given and that the parties are competent to marry each other and finally that any suspensive condition attached to the agreement has been fulfilled.
It is not necessary for the parties to fix a time for the marriage.
An engagement is binding on both parties.
If you want more information visit us at Divorce Forms
In browsing through Divorce Forms websites I found this very interesting article which would be relevent if you were thinking of Divorcing. The Divorce Lawyers in different countries will all have a different approach and it is important that you seek local advice. But this seems to be an accurate reflection on how the Divorce Law in the Divorce Courts in USA would handle the situation.
It’s very common for couples to fight over of the children but today, more than ever many couples are fighting over custody of their pets. What are the reasons for so many pet custody battles and why the increase in bitter battles for pets? One of the primary reasons is because our society has grown more and more attached and fond of their pets, and so when a divorce occurs, it’s difficult to determine who will or should get custody of the animals.
According to a survey in America by the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association, in the U.S alone, there are about 74 million pet dogs in 43.5 million households, and 90.5 million cats in 37.7 million households. Based on those numbers, it isn’t hard to see how popular and important pets are to their human companions and the bond that exists between people and their animals. And because of the large numbers of pets, it’s easy to see what can happen to pets when a marriage ends in divorce. For the most part, there are usually three ways a pet situation can go. One scenario is that an animal is displaced, and ends up in a shelter. Other times, people work out the situation so that one keeps the pets. And the last situation is when couples fight over the pet and a custody battle ensues.
For the most part, the law doesn’t see pets any different than the property a couple divides on the basis of equitable distribution. Even on occasion when a judge realizes that a pet has a special place in the family’s life, the law doesn’t respect that recognition. In fact, in most states, pets are simply considered as property and treated as property in a court of law. But that doesn’t prevent couples from fighting bitterly over their pets just as they would if the pet were a child. One after the other high profile cases show the lengths people go to keep their pets with them or away from their ex partners. A few reported cases are as follows:
In 2001, a woman in Texas was sentenced to 30 days in jail for refusing several orders from a judge to turn over the two cats her ex was awarded in the divorce case.
In San Diego County, California a couple waged a two-year battle over their dog, which wound up costing over $146,000.
In another case in Maryland, two years after their divorce, a couple is back in court fighting over their dog. The circuit judge has threatened to sell the animal and split the proceeds between them if they can’t agree on. The wife has spent $20,000 to keep the dog.
In Dallas,Texas a couple has spent $16,000 in lawyer fees fighting over their dog. After he dognapped the animal for nine days, the wife now gets custody and he gets visitation.
It’s very obvious based on these few cases that people have deep love for their pets and will do practically anything to keep them. But sadly, in most cases, judges refuse to address the issue, considering it a waste of the court’s time. Several states across the country treat pets in the same way they would in dividing up a room full of furniture. Plainly stated, the dog is part of the marital property and has to be equitably divided according to its value, if value can be assigned. Receipts must be shown proving which spouse has been the functional owner of the pet. In other words, the spouse that has paid for things such as medical treatment, training, grooming, maintenance and upkeep is the one who is considered the owner and gets to keep the dog. In some rare cases, tests have been administered based on the “best interest” theory for which measures the degree of attachment between pet and human.
While some people don’t realize it, dogs and cats are not devoid of feelings of loss, depression and anxiety. They also don’t understand why the person has left, so it can affect the behavior of a closely bonded animal. Usually, the animal will go through a period where they look for the absent person, obviously saddened they’re not there. But, generally, after a time, most animals adjust to the person being gone. Many dog trainers report getting calls about pet behavior from those who don’t realize that the break-up of the relationship was the cause of the pet’s distress.
According to a poll taken by members of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, the number of pet custody cases is on the rise and until things change according to law, most courts will continue to treat pets as . Based on the law, it’s probably best for a divorcing couple to make every attempt to negotiate pet amicably on their own rather than getting the courts involved.
If you need more help on this subject, just contact us at Divorce Forms and we will be glad to help you.
