Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’

In case you haven’t heard, a New York judge ordered that a Wife could serve her Husband on Facebook with her divorce documents.  This was only done after the Wife could show that she had no other way to serve Husband, as he had no physical address, did not work, and even though Wife hired several private investigators, they were all unable to locate Husband for service.

It might just be a matter of time before California judges allow service of legal documents via Facebook or other social media. To read more about this in the New York Daily News, you can click on the link here.

I would love to hear what anyone thinks about service on social media, the pros and the cons


Interesting case in Iowa in which Father was granted sole legal and physical custody of the parties children after Mother posted on Facebook how Father was a bad parent and sent Father a threatening email.  The case is In Re Marriage of Bates, which can be read here.

Facebook logo

Facebook logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It really cannot be said enough, if you post it on Facebook, it can and will be used against you in a custody battle.


Enhanced by Zemanta

I have said it many times, if you post online it can come back to bite you.  As reported on and shared by Llynne DeVenny,  a Staten Island belly dancer jiggled her way out of a sweet deal with her ex-husband after he found pictures of her shaking it on the Internet.

Dorothy McGurk won a settlement of $850 a month for life and the couple’s home by convincing a court three years ago that a 1997 car accident left her too injured to work.

Dorothy McGurk

Seems the lovely ex of Brian McGurk, claimed she danced “everyday for three years,”  which is at the time she convinced the court that she was too injured to work.    Brian took her back to court where the judge stripped her of her settlement and ordered her to move out of the house and ordered her to pay Brian’s attorney fees in the amount of $5,000.

People, I can’t say this enough, if you post it someone will see it and believe me, it will be used against you by the ex , or soon to be ex.  If you want to read the whole article, you can do so here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Okay, I don’t know where I was in August of this year, ( I really do know) but apparently I wasn’t paying attention to that there was a new insurance to be had, Divorce Insurance.  This novel insurance became available for the first time in America on August 5, 2010, with the launch of the online insurance website, The company sells individual policies which can be purchased in units with coverage ranging from $1,250.00 per unit to a maximum of 200 units or $250,000 in coverage. After 48 months (four years) the policies mature but insureds can purchase additional riders at $30.00 per unit to reduce the waiting period to 36 months (three years). If a marriage should fail after the policy matures, the couples walk away with a cash payment equivalent to the amount of coverage purchased.

From the financial perspective, even with the high cost of divorce today divorce insurance does not seem very cost effective.  From what I understand, if a standard policyholder who purchased 10 units divorced after 10 years, they would have paid over $19,188 in premiums.  The insurance company would pay them $27,500, which would be taxed over the amount of their premium payments.  To receive this settlement, they would have to be divorced, which could cost $30,000 on the average to well over $100,000, per attorney, on the high end where there are issues of child custody, retirement, business or property ownership to resolve.

If you believe the current statistics that 40 to 50% of first marriages end in divorce, then 50 to 60% of those who purchase divorce insurance will never see a return on their investment and will lose everything they have paid in.  On the flip side, for those ‘lucky enough’ to capitalize on their investment by divorcing, there would be costly legal fees and a break-up of their family structure.  I don’t know about you, but I don’t think I would get married to someone who wants to purchase Divorce Insurance.  Then again, I don’t want to get married at all, so maybe I am the last person you should be listening to on this one.  Maybe you should head on over to WedLock Insurance Company and make up your own mind!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Facebook logo
Image via Wikipedia

I have said it before and I will say it again, be careful what you share on Facebook.  More attorneys are using what you post on your Facebook page in custody and divorce matters.  Even in the UK, the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers says that around 81% of its members have had to deal with — or have themselves used — evidence from social media sources, including Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.  And a UK site reported that the word “Facebook” alone appeared in around 20% of its cases last year.

Citing Facebook posts, one mom lost custody of her kids because she was playing FarmVille or World of Warcraft when she claimed to be spending time with them.  A husband who denied anger management issues but spouted to the world, complete with violent threats on his Facebook profile, also lost custody of his children.

Judges don’t have many compunctions about admitting such evidence, the reigning wisdom being that it’s difficult to impossible to make a fraudulent entry of some kind on a user’s Facebook page.  I have personally seen MySpace accounts used in juvenile dependency matters to substantiate the county’s claims that a parent was involved in gang related activities, enabling the county to terminate parental rights.

So, if you don’t want your significant other using things against you in a custody or divorce matter, start being a responsible adult and don’t post the stuff that shows you in a less than flattering way to the world.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Sign, Wapello, Iowa. This was put up in reacti...
Image via Wikipedia

After trying to crack down on teenage sexting by charging offenders with felony child-porn offenses, states are rethinking their approach. Perhaps, some argue, a split-second decision made by an impulsive teen mind should not carry the risk of decades on a sex-offender registry. Nebraska, Utah, and Vermont all changed their laws last year to reduce severity of the penalties in recognition of the sexualized culture that pervades sites like MySpace and Facebook. Fourteen other states are considering new laws that would treat underage sexters differently from adult child pornographers. On Wednesday, a federal appellate court found that a district attorney had gone too far pushing to bring child-porn charges against some 16-year-old girls who sent pictures of themselves in skimpy clothing to peers’ cellphones. Lawyers say such use of the statues have results far from the intent of child-porn laws, which are to protect kids from pedophiles, not severely punish the bad judgment of a high-school student.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

I found this fascinating quote today:

Therefore, should it come as any great shock that Facebook may provide an avenue for easy infidelity?  Probably not.  However, as a related article from hints, dallying spouses should exercise caution.  Although social networks may open avenues for infidelity, they also make it easier for “suspicious spouses” to spy.  And, the evidence they are discovering online is finding its way into divorce courts all across the country with greater, Cyber-Esq., Dec 2009

You should read the whole article.