Rhode Island Divorce Tips

By:  Christopher A. Pearsall, RI Divorce Lawyer

Aside from the fact that agreeing that divorce should be illegal would literally put me out of business in Rhode Island, I can honestly say that I don’t believe divorce should be declared illegal.

Practically speaking, divorce serves a purpose.

Think about it. One the greatest expectations society has is that out of all the millions of people in the world that you might encounter either now or in the future is to find a spouse that is perfect for you not just for the moment but for life. That is one tall order. It would be more than fair to compare this challenge to finding a single needle in a whole field of haystacks.

So you have to be able to find the person not only that you are compatible with today but who you will grow with and learn with and be compatible with in the future “until death do you part.”  Did I repeat what I just said in a different way?  Yes, I did... because it's important enough that you get the magnitude of what I am saying here.

So if you look at the big picture, that generally means that if divorce were to be illegal that you absolutely must get your decision right the first time. That’s one huge decision. It basically means when you get married that you aren’t allowed to make a mistake.

Marriage came out of contract law. The parties would exchange promises to each other and often rings or some other form of exchange to show a binding contract. However, a marriage contract is so intricately involved with your relationship with your spouse that it is often hard to separate the contract from the relationship.

To be sure there is a lot involved in keeping a marriage healthy and alive. Compatibility both now and in the future regarding education, willingness to learn, growth, financial issues, situational understanding, sexuality, intellect, and many other things come into play to generate a happy and healthy marriage relationship for a lifetime.  One thing is certain.  It takes both spouses and not just one in order for the relationship to work.

Divorce is merely a legal mechanism that provides for the division of the marriage contract much like dividing a partnership that is splitting up in order to help the partners come up with a workable approach to co-parenting their children and dividing what has been accumulated during the course of their marriage so that each spouse can move forward in the best position possible for them and for any children of the relationship.

The fact is that we are not clairvoyant.  None of us can foresee a lack of compatibility with the other spouse years down the road as we each grown and change in different ways.  Nor could many of us foresee intervening factors and unexpected circumstances that change life goals, spouse values, philosophies and expectations in life such that spouses are no longer compatible.  In many cases divorce incompatibility could not only turn into disharmony in families, but hatred, despondency, infidelity and sometimes even violence.  Ultimately I have no doubt that without divorce, the consequences to families and to society as a whole would be more disastrous than if divorce did not exist as a legal remedy at all.

Related articles

RI General Laws § 15-5-12 Domicile and Residence Requirements

Enough of the Bias Already! When Family Court Judges Cross the Line!

Rhode Island Divorce Tips by Attorney Chris Pearsall - Can my ex-spouse sign me up to be billed for childcare without my permission?

Rhode Island Divorce Tips by Attorney Chris Pearsall - How Can I Claim My Child If I Pay Child Support? - A Rhode Island Family Lawyer's Answer

Collaborative Lawyers in Rhode Island - The Mistake of Avoiding the New and Different.

FAQ: Why Can't the Rhode Island Family Court Clerk's help me fill out forms?

Parental Alienation - Exists Despite What Some People with their Own Agenda Report!

Rhode Island Divorce Tips by Attorney Chris Pearsall - Protection from Domestic Abuse - The Rhode Island Process is Fraught with Peril for Men.

Rhode Island Divorce Tips by Attorney Chris Pearsall - In A Divorce it's Important to be Optimistic but also Realistic in the Division of Marital Assets.

Atty Chris Pearsall

Authored By:  Christopher Pearsall, RI Divorce Attorney
a.k.a.  " The Rhode Island Divorce Coach ℠ "

Google+ Author Profile

Publisher on Google+

This article is more of a short opinion of mine than it is fact.  You can feel free to agree with me or disagree with me and I certainly will respect your opinion.  

From the very beginning of my practice attorneys have told me that I wouldn't be able to survive as a lawyer if I didn't practice in more than one area of law.  Quite a few attorneys told me that I needed to pick at least three (3) areas of law with more of a recommendation of five (5) areas.  It was explained me as diversification like one would do with a financial portfolio.

In short, I disagreed.  The more areas you practice in, the more law you have to keep up with, the more rules of court you have to keep up with, the more care you have to take in order to prevent yourself from a malpractice claim.

Attorneys tried to convince me that it wasn't that hard and you just keep up with the issues that relate to your cases as they arise.  I didn't agree.

In the end it came down to one thing.  I believed that by choosing more than one area of law I was trying to be a "jack of all trades and a master of none."  My opponents by comparison felt that it was enough to keep up with parts of the law that affected the specific cases that came to us and that was enough.  In the end the attorney who practiced in more areas of law was more diversified and would be able to get more clients and consequently make more money.

Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that dedicated and caring divorce attorneys would choose to practice in family law and perhaps one other area of law if they truly expected to keep up with the law and serve their client's properly.

Do I make the money these other lawyers make?  No, probably not.  In fact, it comes with its sacrifices including the income but they are worth it and necessary to practice in a way that I believe I should be practicing in both for myself and my clients.

When you interview your family law attorney, find out how diverse he or she is.  It will be worth it to know how many areas he or she practices in.  The more areas... the more clients the attorney is likely to have and the thinner the attorney is spread.

The call is yours and this is purely my unique view and opinion.  I share it because many people don't think of it this way.  The few numbers of practice areas, the more likely it is that the attorney's competency in the area(s) practiced in greater.  I practice divorce and specific areas of family law. It's not just part of what I do.... it's ALL I DO!  

I'm here for those who need a caring and affordable divorce and family law attorney.  Hidden away in a small office and rural area of Coventry, Rhode Island... I am the unsuspecting attorney most people are looking for.  My best to all who go before the Rhode Island Family Court.  I understand.... I've walked in your shoes!

On July 11, 2012 a new Rhode Island Supreme Court decision was issued in the case of Sofya M. Zhorkova v. Paul D. Gaudreau, No. 2011-295-Appeal  (RI - July 11, 2012).  It was an interesting case that I took to trial on behalf of the Defendant and the trial court found for the Defendant.  The determination was the the Plaintiff failed to meet the standards necessary to prove all the elements necessary to show that a common law marriage existed.

The Plaintiff appealed the trial court decision of Judge Stephen Capineri essentially arguing that the Plaintiff had, in fact, met her burden of proof that there was a common law marriage between the parties as evidenced by joint tax returns filed is husband and wife by the parties.  These joint tax returns were filed for four (4) of the twelve (12) or so years the parties lived together.  The Plaintiff's attorney argued that the joint tax returns were proof of the vast majority of the standards necessary to prove a common law marriage.

The defendant went to a few attorneys before consulting with me and hiring me as his lawyer.  Before engaging me the Defendant inquired from several well known long-term practitioners.  In short, those practitioners essentially informed the Defendant that since he had filed joint tax returns as husband and wife for various years, that the court would most assuredly find that there was a Common law marriage between him and the Plaintiff.

The advice was, however, short sighted and was incorrect.  The fact is that Rhode island Common Law marriages aren't very common anymore. 

To prove that a marriage exists at Rhode Island common law, the two people must have (1) had the intent that they both be married to one another, (2) that the intention existed at the same time and is not conditional upon any other action, event, or thing, (3) that the parties demonstrated by their words and/or actions their intention to be husband and wife such that their was a uniform and consistent belief among friends, family, and the community that they intended to live as husband and wife, and (4) that there was, in fact, a uniform and consistent belief that existed among friends, family, and the community at large that the parties were, in fact, married.

The Plaintiff's argument on appear focused on the joint tax returns on appeal.  The Plaintiff argued that the filing of joint federal tax returns demonstrated an intention for the two parties to be married, that the intention must have been at the same time because the tax returns were mutual and signed at the same time and therefore they exercised their intention to be husband and wife at the same time.

The Plaintiff further argued that by signing and filing the joint federal tax returns as husband and wife that both parties were outwardly representing to the Federal and the State of Rhode Island Division of Taxation and anyone they provided those tax forms too for loans or financing that they were making an outward and affirmative demonstration to the community, friends and family that they were married.  The Plaintiff also argued that at different times while the parties were living together that they each placed the other on their health insurance policies as a spouse to obtain coverage.

Many practitioners focus on the obvious and make a "quick call" if they give prospective clients legal advice.  In this case, three well-known divorce practitioners advised the Defendant that he had no chance of winning and that the court was certain to declare that he and the Plaintiff were married at common law.

Personally, my philosophy is to give correct and knowledgeable legal advice or not to give any at all.  Thankfully the Defendant did call me and we took a detailed hour for a paid legal advice session to do a full analysis of his situation.  By the time we had completed the call, I was certain that with the right presentation the court would not find there was a common law marriage because the Plaintiff had to prove each and every aspect of her case by clear and convincing evidence.

The attorneys that the Defendant sought counsel from before the Defendant found me would have been subjecting the client's assets to substantial exposure of loss if he had believed them and not kept looking and found me.

Be careful, that a quick review and some fast advice by an attorney who doesn't provide a thorough assessment of your case doesn't lead you in the wrong direction.

When it comes to common law marriages, they are, in fact, rare.  The plaintiff's burden to prove a common law divorce under Rhode Island law is not an easy one.  All it takes is enough doubt in the judge's mind that makes him or her reasonably hesitate in finding for the Plaintiff on every aspect of his or her claim is all that is needed to stop the court from finding that there is a common law marriage.

If there is doubt, the evidence is not as clear and convincing to the court as it needs to be.  Create some reasonable doubt in the Judge's mind and one more common law marriage is defeated making them even less common.

Yes, Rhode Island Common Law divorces aren't so common anymore.

All My Best to You on Your Journey Through The RI Family Court,
Attorney Christopher A. Pearsall - "The Rhode Island Divorce Coach"™ 

I'm Attorney Christopher A. Pearsall and the focus of my law practice is on Rhode Island Divorce and Family Law.  I would like to preface this article by stating that what follows is my opinion regarding divorce and family law practice within Rhode Island.  There are countless divorce lawyers in our state that would not only disagree with me but would also prefer to see me disbarred rather than sharing my experience with hundreds of lawyers throughout the state simply because my articles inform the consumer and prospective client.  With that said, let me begin.

My philosophy about the practice of law is what I have come to call "Client-centric." 

What is that, right? 

It is a divorce law practice centered on your needs as the "client."   Now, since clients are the life-blood of a lawyer's practice.  A divorce lawyer must abide by all legal and ethical requests made by the lawyer.  Now, you may be thinking. . "Wait a minute, isn't every divorce lawyer's practice "Client-centric".

My answer is a resounding "No".   Yes, Rhode Island Divorce lawyers like myself rely upon clients in order to put  food on the table for their own families, to pay their own bills, and to provide for their own retirement.  However, the question I put to most Rhode Island Divorce Lawyers is this.  What standard of living are you creating for yourself at your clients' expense?   This is partially what I mean by "Client-centric."

Let me give you an example.  I drive a 1998 Chevy Cavalier with 130,000 miles on it.  I have this car because it fits my goal of maintaining a "Client-centric" divorce law practice here in Rhode Island.

The car has working air-conditioning for the summer season.  The heat comes on quickly in the winter.  It is comfortable, looks reasonably professional, and it gets me from here to there.  It gets excellent gas mileage and because it is an older car, the automobile insurance costs significantly less than a BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar, Hummer, and other status symbol cars driven by many of today's Rhode Island's divorce and family lawyers.

In truth, as a Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer I am proud to drive this 1998 Chevy Cavalier because it is one of the best examples of my "Client-centric" divorce law practice.  That is why I drive it and that is why I choose to keep it.  Why?  Because it is better for my clients that I do so.

Could I get a newer car that gets good gas mileage, is comfortable, has air-conditioning and heat and looks professional?  Absolutely, but that comes at a price.  More money would have to be spent to get a newer car.  More money has to be spent on insurance.  More money may have to be spent on gasoline at today's outrageous prices.  That money would have to come from where?   My clients!  If it's not a necessity and doesn't benefit my clients then it doesn't get purchased, plain and simple.

Certainly I wouldn't mind a newer car with new bells and whistles, but NOT at the expense of my clients.   When I have a car that does its intended job there's no need to get a new one.  My standard of living and my ego do not require a fancy car.  After all, whatever car I have comes from income and benefits received through my clients . . . and let's face it. . .  when the chips are down it's not a lawyers's fancy car that gives you legal advice or goes into court to argue on your behalf at a divorce hearing.

In my opinion, most Rhode Island Divorce Lawyers are not even close to being "Client-centric."  In fact, most divorce lawyers in Rhode Island seem to be "Lawyer-centric", a practice concept I have chosen to depart from with great haste.  A "Lawyer-Centric" approach does not fit into the philosophy of my divorce practice because I choose not to achieve a higher standard of living if it means doing so will be at the expense of my clients' hard work and hard earned money.

In my humble opinion, as the title states, I believe that "Clients Deserve Better!"

The idea is whether you as a client want to engage or remain with a Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer or Family Law Attorney who is  "Lawyer-Centric" or "Client-Centric." 

The difference is relatively straight-forward.  In a "Lawyer-centric" law practice, the focus is upon meeting the needs of the lawyer(s).  For instance, the needs of the lawyer include the lawyer's overhead expenses of having an office, telephones, facsimile, internet access, legal reasearch services, office rent, paper, copiers, office supplies, secretarial support, grounds maintenance, electricity, heat, water and sewerage costs, town/city equipment taxes, long distance charges, bank fees and any other expenses the lawyer must pay for before he or she even receives a dime in income. 

Secondarily, the lawyer must consider how much he or she has to pay for his or her own personal expenses for their own family, including a home mortgage, car payment, equity line, credit cards, gasoline expenses, home heating costs, central air-conditioning costs, electricity, telephone costs, high-speed internet costs, cel phone costs, home insurance, life insurance, auto insurance, business clothing, student loan payments from law school, possible daycare/childcare expenses, possible health insurance payments and monthly co-pays for medications, etc... to say little of entertainment, vacation costs, summer homes, boats, even airplanes for those lawywers with a higher standard of living.

If you take all of these financial expenses together (as I mentioned in the previous paragraph), it's fairly easy to see how many divorce lawyers in Rhode Island would focus on themselves as lawyers and their financial burden rather than on their clients.  After all, that's quite a heavy load a lawyer might have riding on their shoulders and they want to make sure they make enough money to cover all the office expenses and home bills from their client fees. 

Where does that money come from?  Where else?  You . . .  their clients!

Now you might be saying, that my analysis is a bit unfair because all divorce lawyers aren't (or can't be) like that.  Certainly I must say that my opinion holds true for most divorce lawyers in Rhode Island who have a practice focused on divorce and family law on a full-time basis.

Ultimately, if you see your attorney driving a Jaguar, a BMW or Mercedes it might be a good exercise to remember that you as the client are paying for that car.

It is certainly not a stretch for me to say that when you sit in a fancy law office waiting room reviewing a magazine until the secretary brings you to your Rhode Island divorce lawyer's office for your appointment that you consider a few things. 

If you are a client of that lawyer, consider that you are paying for that secretary, you are paying for the central air conditioning that keeps your lawyer and his or her other clients and staff cool during the summer.  You are paying for the heat in the winter that keeps your divorce lawyer and her or her other clients and the lawyer's staff warm in the winter.  You are paying for the lighting in each room that you pass by as you are led to your divorce attorney's office. 

There may even be a direct correlation here.  The fancier the office, the bigger the building, the larger the parking lot, the larger the grounds that need to be maintained, the nicer the car your lawyer drives, the more your lawyers the law firm has intheir office, the more you pay as a client to cover those expenses.

There may even be a correlation between your Rhode Island divorce lawyer's hourly rate and retainer and his or her desired standard of living.  In either event, you . . . the client . . . pay for all that!

People often complain that lawyers "charge too much."  Well this might explain it.  If you add all of this together for any lawyer, it's a fairly huge financial burden to bear.  Yet this is what people have come to expect.  Clients expect that it will cost "too much" to retain a good divorce lawyer.  Client's want to have an attorney with a fancy office, free parking, nicely kept grounds and a sharp looking outfit when you meet the lawyer in their office.  Ultimately, clients cringe as their initial meeting comes to a close and they wait for the financial bombshell to drop as the Rhode Island divorce lawyer states how much it will cost you for his or her services and what the initial retainer will be.

There you go.  The amount you pay a lawyer is not necessarily determined by your divorce lawyer's time, skill, competence or experience.  What you are really paying is dependent upon the lawyer's building, car, lifestyle, summer home, boat, airplane, vacations for weeks to the Bahamas, Hawaii or some other exotic place, private schools for their children, etc... 

What does it cost you to retain the lawyer?  It depends upon the lawyer and everything the lawyer has to bear financially.  That's what I refer to as a "Lawyer-Centric" approach to Rhode Island Divorce practice.  Everything revolves around the lawyer in the "Lawyer-Centric" approach.

Now let's change gears for a moment and consider a more modern approach.  We're in a recession and most divorce lawyers continue to do the same thing they've always done for decades, with few exceptions.  Yes, you guessed it . . . the Lawyer-Centric approach to divorce practice.  Why?  Because that's what they are used to.  Noone likes to sacrifice or compromise anything from their law office or from their lifestyle.  Everyone wants to move ahead and make more money, including lawyers.  Everyone wants to do everything without reinventing the wheel.

Yet here is the rub.  Times have changed.  Just about everyone has affordable access to the internet, servers, computer programs and technology that now allows us to take projects that once took two and a half hours and compress them into one hour or less.  Though we are in a recession, we also have access to newer, more advanced technologies that enable us to do things faster and more easily, the rates of lawyers not only in Rhode Island divorce proceedings but in many other areas of law have not budged.

The theory behind this is that many lawyers believe that simply because they have taken advantage of these new technologies to speed up their work, that they should not be deprived of the income that they would have received if the lawyer had chosen not to use the new technologies.  So what happens?  Lawyers end up billing the client for 2 1/2 hours of work when, in fact, the lawyers time may have been reduced to 1 hour due to new advances in technology and new software run on highly advanced computer systems.

Now certainly there is a cost to the lawyer for purchasing the technology, perhaps maintaining the technology equipment and such, and that needs to be paid for as well, yet at some point that should be considered "paid for" and the client should reap a benefit from that in the form of a reduced hourly rate, doesn't that make sense?

It reminds me of a toll bridge that pays for itself in its first two years of use but goes on collecting revenues for the state for another 20 years without any reduction for taxpayers.  Why?  Because now the monies are used to pay for other things in the state that the "powers that be" see as essential to the Rhode Island lifestyle.  Just as the monies collected from clients that have more than paid for the technologies used by the lawyers will go to pay for higher incomes, better cars, longer vacations in Arruba, etc...  Yet it's rare that the client gets the financial benefit of these advances in technology even if they are talked up as a selling point by the lawyer to get your business.

Here's where I come in.  You see, I don't like the "Lawyer-Centric" approach.  The reason I don't like it is simply because it continues to promote the notion that lawyers are all money hungry, greedy, overpaid, scam artists who are only out for themselves and everything they can get from you. 

The fact is, there are good attorneys out there who give their clients the benefit of everything financially possible.  Some lawyers are generous to a fault with their time and have harnessed every economical technology, software, product, and service for your benefit as a divorce client. The ultimate result that you get is either a lower rate or faster service reflected in the lawyer's billing.  That's the "Client-Centric" approach. 

The Client-Centric approach to the practice of divorce law (or any specialized area of law for that matter) is focused on the needs of the client.  The lawyer's focus then shifts to serving more clients for less income and less rewards in order to reach his or her own financial needs.  Yes, it means the lawyer may have to work harder and longer hours to achieve his or her personal financial goals.  However, with the Client-Centric law practice you end up paying for your divorce lawyer's time, skill, and experience and the maximized resources he or she uses.

I heard the term "Client-Centric" used by attorneys in a large firm as far back as two decades ago.  Unfortunately, the term was used in a different context.  As used at that time and by that firm, it meant to network further into a client's existing ties in the community to bring in more clients.  In otherwords it was a networking technique which continued to benefit the law firm by wining and dining the client and by using financial resources of the firm to essentially "schmooze" the client to build trust and get more client referrals, etc... 

I will not say that this was a bad business move.  After all, businesses (particularly law firms) are out there to make money and to continue to network and therefore survive.  Yet at what point does the client get a true financial benefit from today's technologies?  The use of a "Client-Centric" approach as I initially heard it used was merely a means of manipulated marketing.  It is not a wonder why lawyers do not have a good name today if this is a marketing method being circulated nearly two decades ago?

Well, it is a new millenium and perhaps I am a new pioneer and advocate for the client.  Money is not the "end all" and "be all" of things.  Personally I would rather make considerably less money and reap the rewards of a child properly returned to his mother being falsely accused of being a drug addict and of abusing the child.  A reasonable payment for my skills and hard work, a thank you card from the mother and the hug from that child were payment enough.

Yet here is the problem?  These Rhode Island divorce and family law lawyers are hard to find.  I will not say that I am a dying breed.  I will say that I am a growing breed and I hope that I can convince more divorce attorneys to go the way of the true "Client-Centric" practitioner, especially in divorce and family law.

Families here in Rhode Island are in need of help and healing.  In my humble opinion, most of the damage done today to our Rhode Island families is within the divorce and family law practice.  It can be helped financially by taking a Client-Centric approach in a divorce law practice and focusing on the needs of the client and the family unit.

I urge my fellow Rhode Island Divorce Lawyers and Family Law Practitioners to adopt a practice philosophy focused on the needs of their clients and not upon their bank accounts.  Material possessions are not the measure of a person's worth or the success of a person's life.  Though material possessions may provide enjoyment for a time, they do not provide the happiness and fulfillment of living a good life and helping our fellow men and women.

Turning around the idea of the stereotypical divorce lawyer will not happen overnight.  It will take time and the diligence of more than just myself and a few other practitioners.  In time I am hopeful that the black eye that lawyers have with the public will dissipate and people will see us for what we truly are and who we were truly meant to be  . . . servants of the people.