Is Lifelong Alimony Constitutional?
87299
Alimony is established b State Law. Each state has different laws reguarding divorce. It sounds a little far out but I could not say that under certain circumstances that it could happen. Best thing is to get a good divorce lawyer who will represent your best interests in a divorce proceeding
43513
In the US, the last vestige of the dowry is the tradition that ther bride's family pay for the wedding.  \n\nOf course, that's dying off too, because girlies complain "that's not fair"\n\nbut alimony is?
966476
First, remember that just because a state follows Community Property laws doesn't mean that all property is automatically CP. If the income derives solely from a separate property asset, it generally remains separate property. Each CP state has different rules for modifying this, but the basic premise remains.\n\nAlso remember that Louisiana is a civil law, rather than common law, jurisdiction. That means that each judge is free to interpret the statutory laws as they wish, and that prior judicial rulings do not have the same binding effect that they do in common law states. Thus, unless the legislative statute specifically determines what happens in a particular situation, the outcome is less certain than it would be in other states.\n\nThere are not enough facts to answer your question fully. If the working spouse owns the business, and owned the business before getting married, then the business may be considered a separate property asset, and thus any proceeds are separate property. Or the working spouse may be entitled to specific assets because of a pre-nup agreement. Or because of debt allocation. Or for dozen other reasons, all dependent on facts not listed.\n\nThe bottom line is that the judge probably is ruling according to what the law (the legislative statutes) say, but either the statutes don't cover this particular case, or the facts lead to a situation that may not make sense at first glance, because of the way the law is written. But if the judge isn't following the law, that's grounds for appeal.
5168
NO...the US Supreme Court ruled several years ago that the prior assets and current income of a parent's spouse (In this case, you) cannot be presumed to be available for the purposes of child support or spousal support, even in states where all income is otherwise considered to be community property and all debts considered to be joint obligations...that means you are not legally on the hook for his kids and his ex wife can't try to get your house...in a nutshell.\nIf you two marry and he stops working or something, they can haul his tail to prison if they have cause to believe that he's willfully avoiding his obligation, but your paycheck cannot be considered in deciding or fulfilling his support order.\nYou will want to consult an attorney specialising in family law about specifics such as whether you should file your taxes jointly or seperately, how a jointly purchased home should be deeded and to draw up a prenuptual agreement about any inheritance you may recieve in the future and MAKE OUT A WILL....Both of you.\n(the Supreme Court ruling left some confusion about the distribution of assets aquired by one party but within the marriage)
247399
One marriage at a time - no limit to sequential marriages as long as the previous marriage has been legally terminated by divorce or annullment.
88680
You need to decide what your beliefs and boundaries are.  If you don't mind living with someone for the rest of your life without a legal marriage, then do it, if not, then give him an option, marriage or you are gone. Most states have the policy of common law marriage anyway, after 5 years (varies per state) of living together you are considered legally married anyway.
794609
Generally, infidelity is grounds for reducing, if not eliminating, alimony.  You have to be able (and willing) to prove it.
656004
Below is a link to information listing the criteria which courts in California use in determine if and how much spousal support is applicable.\n\n\nhttp://www.divorcesupport.com/divorce/California-Spousal-Support-Maintenance-Alimony-441.html\n\nHope this helps!!
237307
no\n\nthe federal government would have to recognize the marrage and they dont at this time.\n\nif you have other ground then go ahead but not for "spouse of citizen" as a reason
230539
Yes you can, but make sure you get child support from him. Also if you are in a state that awards alimony I would go for that also.
105946
anullments are usually given based on certain criteria, like for example that the marriage was never consummated or that one of the partners was coerced into marrying the other against his/her will, or something else that would make the agreement invalid.  if the criteria are met, i don't think that there is any time limit, but that might depend on a particular state's laws
682896
Actually, the right to marry, bear children, and to raise children in "traditional" family settings are recognized as fundamental rights. See Loving v. Virginia (1967), Zablocki v. Redhail (1978), Michael H. v. Gerald D. (1989),  Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925).\n\nThe state does have a compelling interest that can be asserted to balance against these fundamental rights, however. That interest is the "protecting the physical and psychological well-being of minors". See Sable Communications of California, Inc. v. FCC (1989), Reno v. ACLU (1997); also Yarborough v. Yarborough (1933).\n\nThat compelling interest, when achieved through regulations that are narrowly tailored using the least restrictive means possible, satisfy the strict scrutiny standard. Thus, even where there is a fundamental right involved, the state can intervene to ensure the well-being of the child.
872121
Your story is very complicated i suggest that you see an AR lawyer specializing in estates.\nBelow is a brief outline of the law.\nThe property that each spouse brings into the marriage, that is, the property that s/he owned before the marriage, is considered to be "separate" or "non-marital" property. For the property to remain separate, the spouse must keep it apart from marital or community property; that is, s/he would keep it entirely in his/her name. Once the separate property has been commingled (mixed) with marital or community property, it becomes part of the marital property.\nFor example, consider a bank account with $10,000 in it owned by woman before her marriage. This woman then marries and both she and her husband regularly deposit their respective paychecks into the account and periodically withdraw money to pay for their living expenses. At the time of separation twenty years later, the bank account has $5,000 in it. Since marital property has gone into it (deposits of the paychecks and marital or community debts have been paid from it is impossible to trace the original separate property money from that of marital or community property. The result is that this bank account has changed from separate property to marital property.\nSome states, such as California, have a separate property rule that says that all property brought into the marriage, (including gifts and inheritance), that is kept separate and apart from community property remains the separate property of the spouse that owns it.
160885
It depends on what state you are living in now (presumably the same state that granted the divorce), and their laws governing such things.  Depending on the state, yes, he certainly can prevent you from doing so.
1168190
No....law does not recognize a "common law" marriage.  It is thought of more like a partnership.
972700
It sounds like you've already done your research since you stated that you'll get half of the assets.  You might also be entitled to alimony.
969264
California is not a common-law marriage state; nor is it a palimony jurisdiction.\n\nUnless there is something you haven't said it's hard to see a basis for her claim. If she did, contrary to what seems to have been the case, make contributions towards payment on the house or mortgage, she may have some sort of claim. Otherwise she is blowing smoke.