New law would have required all couples in cali to read marriage laws BEFORE marriage

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by Epiphany, Sep 26, 2007.

  1. But Davis veoted the bill. Why? No guy would get married

    This fact sheet is only intended to provide general information and is not intended to provide legal advice. An attorney should be consulted for answers to specific legal questions. This fact sheet complies with AB 1920, which was vetoed in 2000 by Governor Gray Davis.

    Since about 50% of marriages end in divorce, persons contemplating marriage should be familiar with the laws associated with dissolutions in California.


    California is a community property state. This means that any assets or property acquired during the marriage will be split equally during a dissolution, regardless of whose labor acquired that assets.[1]

    Separate property is property that is not divided during a dissolution. This includes assets held prior to marriage, and gifts and inheritance received during marriage. However, separate property may convert to community property if it is placed in a joint account or used to purchase community property.[2]


    A premarital agreement can protect assets from community property distribution. An agreement is only valid if each party is represented by their own attorney.[3] Even then, family court has discretion to void portions of agreements it finds were unfair.[4] Note: a premarital agreement cannot modify child or spousal support obligations.


    During marriage each party is obligated to the debts assumed by the other party, regardless of whether they approved of the expenditures. Neither party may hide assets or expenditures from the other during a marriage. A detailed financial disclosure, including bank statements and tax returns, must be submitted to the court prior to a dissolution. These documents become a matter of public record.


    The obligation to support a spouse at the standard of living established DURING the marriage does not terminate with a dissolution. Family court has wide discretion in setting spousal support.[5] When a standard of living is augmented by spending the inheritance or assets of one party, spousal support can exceed the earnings of the payer.[6] A marriage of ten years or longer can incur a lifetime support obligation.


    The amount of a child support order is set by a guideline formula of about 25% of income for one child and 40% of income for two or more children.[7] If family court believes the noncustodial parent is not earning at their capacity, the court may impute income to increase these percentages.[8] In addition to the base guidelines above, the court may order additional support for daycare and medical insurance in expenses. The actual costs of supporting the children are irrelevant to the amount of the support order.


    California has zero tolerance for domestic violence. The Violence Against Women?s Act has instituted a mandatory arrest policy for ALLEGED abuse. Abuse includes not only striking, but any action which causes fear in a spouse, such as yelling or breaking items. Family court may issue a restraining order without any burden of proof that allegations are true. Once issued, the order becomes a presumption that the complaining party should have sole custody of the children, and provides for immediate incarceration without right to a jury trial for phoning, mailing, or coming within a specified distance of the other party or one's children.[9] These restrictions are independent of acquittal of any related criminal charge.

    The Judicial Council has prepared an informational booklet that provides more details on this topic.


    Rape is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years.[10]? Any unconsentual act against a spouse -- whether by force, duress, or intoxication -- is rape.


    A typical divorce lawyer costs $200 per hour. The cost of a contested divorce can range from $10,000 to $50,000, or more. If there is an income disparity between the parties, the court can order one party to pay the legal expenses of the other party.

    BILL NUMBER: AB 1920
    VETOED DATE: 09/18/2000

    To Members of the California Assembly:

    I am returning Assembly Bill No. 1920 without my signature.

    The day that two people are married should be one of the happiest
    days of their lives. As I said last year, the State of California
    can reasonably assume that people entering into marriage are fully
    cognizant of their contractual rights and responsibilities.

    I believe it is presumptuous and in very bad taste, to require the
    County Clerk, on the eve of someone's marriage, to offer a couple a
    document detailing all of the problems and costs associated with the
    dissolution of that marriage.

    For these reasons, I must veto this bill.


  2. Wow - you're right. No guy in his right mind would follow thru on marriage after reading that, scary.
  3. Banjo


    All it's saying is , only marry a woman with a lot more money than you. They should call it the Gigolo Act.