PENDING HOUSE BILL WOULD EXTEND CHILD SUPPORT THROUGH COLLEGE

On February 10, 2012, House Bill 986 was introduced in Annapolis. If passed into law, this bill would significantly change current Maryland law regarding child support. Under existing law, child support is generally paid until a minor child turns 18 or graduates from high school, whichever is later (but does not run past the age of 19). Maryland parents currently have no legal obliigation to pay for their children's college or post-secondary education.

Under HB986, if a child is in college, child support would continue until the (now adult) child turned 21. This would have the effect of continuing child support for an additional three years for children enrolled in college or a vocationsal school. This is a big change for all parties involved.

Furthermore, the bill would apply to existing child support orders. So, for example, if a parent is paying child support under an existing support order, that parent might have to pay child support until the child turns 21, even though when the support order was first entered, support was to only be paid until the child graduated from high school.

Note that as the bill is written these extended support payments would continue to go to the recipient spouse, not the adult child.

For or againt the bill? Contact your representatives in Annapolis and let them know where you stand.

Changes in Custody and Teenage Children

Many divorced parents want to know at what age their children can make decisions regarding the custody arrangement they are subject to. By Maryland statute, a 16 year old can file a petition with the Court in their own name seeking a change in custody.

Maryland Family Law Article 9-103 provides:

§ 9-103. Petition by child to change custody (a) Petition by child. -- A child who is 16 years old or older and who is subject to a custody order or decree may file a petition to change custody.

(b) Guardian or next friend not required. -- A petitioner under this section may file the proceeding in the petitioner's own name and need not proceed by guardian or next friend.

(c) Hearing required; amendment of custody order or decree. -- Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, if a petitioner under this section petitions a court to amend a custody order or decree, the court: (1) shall hold a hearing; and (2) may amend the order or decree and place the child in the custody of the parent designated by the child.

Getting a Divorce Gets Easier In Maryland

On October 1, 2011, getting a divorce will get easier for many Maryland residents. On that date, a new law goes into effect allowing people to get divorced if they have been living separate and apart for more than 12 months. Under prior law, you could get divorced in Maryland if you had been separated from your spouse for 12 months, but you had to prove that the separation was "mutual and voluntary" on the part of both parties. A spouse who wanted to delay the divorce could assert that the separation was not mutual and voluntary and could drag out the divorce for an additional 12 months. That is no longer the case under the new law.

Specifics are Key in Separation Agreements

Having a very detailed, specific separation agreement is an important factor in ensuring that you will not become embroiled in post-divorce litigation over the rights and duties of the parties under the agreement. In recent months, I have been involved in several cases where former spouses are litigating over their obligations set out in their separation agreement. The common factor in all three cases? The original agreements were vague, ambigious, had terms subject to more than one interpretation or were missing key details.

A very specific, detailed agreement may save you lots of aggravation and money later.

Courtroom Attire - Avoid a Fashion Faux Pas

It's summer in Washington, D.C. and it's hot. But that does not excuse bad attire in the courtroom.

As I sat in court this morning, I saw a number of parties wearing t-shirts and shorts. I saw another party heading to District Court in a tank top. In my book, that's a big mistake.

Courts are venerable institutions and the Judges who hear your cases warrant and deserve your respect. Your appearance is important and sends a message to them. Even though it may be 90 degrees outside, men should always wear khakis or slacks and a dress shirt, preferably, or at a minimum, a collared shirt. Although I prefer my male clients to appear in jacket and tie, business casual is acceptable. Women should also avoid shorts and t-shirts.

Appearances matter. Look nice for Court. It sends a message.

Does Injecting Your Child with Botox Constitute Child Abuse?

San Francisco's Human Service Agency is investigating a pageant mother who told a national television audience that she injected her 8 year old daughter with Botox in preparation for beauty pageants that her daughter was participating in. The mother was apparently concerned about the presence of wrinkles on her daughter's forehead.

Words to the wise: don't inject your elementary school children with Botox (especially if you are in the middle of a contested custody fight).

Alimony and Cohabitation - Maryland House Bill 304

I testified before the Judiciary Committee of the Maryland House of Delegates yesterday in support of House Bill 304, which would amend Family Law Article Section 11-108 to provide that statutory alimony would terminate upon the alimony recipient's cohabitation. Currently, alimony terminates upon re-marriage, but not cohabitation. As a result of this distinction, a number of people are opting to cohabitate rather than re-marry solely in order to preserve the payment of alimony to them. I believe the proposed amendment would update Maryland's alimony laws to reflect current societal standards and practices and make the law more equitable.



Following the hearing yesterday, I think it is unlikely this bill as written will be enacted into law. Some of the delegates on the Judiciary Committee had reasonable issues regarding the verbiage of the bill, including how the bill defines "cohabitation", while others seemed to feel that it would be inequitable to terminate alimony upon cohabitation as a blanket rule.



I do, however, believe that there may be support in the legislature for modifying the current statute to clearly state that "cohabitation" may be a factor considered by a Judge in deciding whether to terminate statutory alimony or adopting a factual test to determine whether alimony should be terminated or modified upon cohabitation by the recipient.