FLINT DIVORCE ATTORNEY AND CASE WHERE WIFE GETS MORE PROPERTY

Flint Divorce Attorney Terry Bankert ,810-235-1970 discusses several Issues: 1.Divorce;


2.The defendant-husband's claim that the property division was inequitable; Pickering v. Pickering; Reed v. Reed;

3.The factors in Sparks v. Sparks; Berger v. Berger; Thames v. Thames;

4Infidelity; Davey v. Davey;

4Dissipation of martial assets; Woodington v. Shokoohi



SOURCE:Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished 02/15/2011),

Case Name: S----- v. S-----, Livingston Circuit Court, LC No. 08-003892-DO

e-Journal Number: 48129,Judge(s): Per Curiam - Murphy, Murray, and Shapiro,

[Comments of Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert ALL CAPS or trb]



YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF YOUR LOCAL DIVORCE COURT



A trial court’s factual findings will not be reversed unless they are found

to be clearly erroneous, meaning that, this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Reed v Reed, 265 Mich App 131, 150; 693 NW2d 825 (2005).



GOOD LUCK IF YOU TRY

A trial court’s dispositional ruling should be affirmed unless this Court is left with the firm conviction that the property division was inequitable. Pickering, 268 Mich App at 7.



HIGH COURT DECISION



The Michigan Court of Appeals held, inter alia, that an unequal division of marital property is not contrary to Michigan law as long as it is based on the appropriate criteria, the trial court properly determined the situation (after a 38-year marriage) did not warrant a 50-50 property division based on the property division factors, and the trial court did not err in awarding the plaintiff-wife $150,000 in alimony in gross.

The LIVINGSTON DIVORCE trial court used its equitable powers to mold relief according to the nature of the case and did what was necessary to accord complete equity and to resolve the controversy. The MICHGIAN COURT OF APPEALS concluded that reversal was not warranted as to the division of property.

HOW DOES A COURT MAKE A PROPERTY DIVISION?

In dividing the marital property, the trial court’s opinion here addressed the property division

factors set forth in Sparks v Sparks, 440 Mich 141, 159-160; 485 NW2d 893 (1992).

The Sparks Court stated:

We hold that the following factors are to be considered wherever they are

relevant to the circumstances of the particular case: (1) duration of the marriage,

(2) contributions of the parties to the marital estate, (3) age of the parties, (4)

health of the parties, (5) life status of the parties, (6) necessities and circumstances

of the parties, (7) earning abilities of the parties, (8) past relations and conduct of

the parties, and (9) general principles of equity. There may even be additional

factors that are relevant to a particular case. For example, the court may choose to

consider the interruption of the personal career or education of either party. The

determination of relevant factors will vary depending on the facts and

circumstances of the case. [Id. (citation omitted).]



HUSBANDS ARGUMENT-WIFE CAN WORK!

On appeal the defendant-husband argued the trial court made factual findings that were unsupported by the record - particularly that the wife might be unable to work in the future due to poor health,

HUSBAND ARGUES WIFE EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR BAD INVESTMENTS

the defendant should bear the sole responsibility for bad marital investments and (indirectly) the balance on the equity line of credit,

HUSBANDS ARGUMENT- INFIDELITY NOT A BIG DEAL

and the LIVINGSTON DIVORCE trial court placed an inordinate amount of weight on his infidelity in dividing the martial assets.



…defendant complains that the trial court placed an inordinate amount of emphasis

on his affair and ordered an inequitable property distribution to punish him. A circumstance "to be considered in the determination of property division is the fault or misconduct of a party." Davey v Davey, 106 Mich App 579, 581-582; 308 NW2d 468 (1981). However, “the trial court must consider all the relevant factors and not assign disproportionate weight to any one circumstance.” Sparks, 440 Mich at 158.

HUSBAND CONTINUED AFFAIR WHILE IN COUNSELING WITH WIFE

The trial court found defendant’s affair to be significant in relationship to assessing defendant’s credibility. It is undisputed that defendant lied to plaintiff

about the existence of the affair, misled her about the termination of the affair, and participated in counseling with plaintiff while still engaging in the affair.

WIFE GETS $150,000

The court noted that the disparity in the property division was essentially created by the award to the wife of $150,000 in alimony in gross, given that the trial court otherwise evenly divided, for the most part, the marital estate.

DID YOU KNOW?

Woodington v Shokoohi, 288 Mich App 352; __ NW2d __ (2010) (when a party has dissipated marital assets absent the fault of the other spouse, the value of the dissipated assets can be included in the marital estate).



WHAT IS ALIMONY IN GROSS

If alimony, now referred to as spousal support, is either a lump sum or a definite sum to be paid in installments, it is alimony in gross, which is not truly alimony intended for a spouse’s maintenance, but rather is in the nature of a division of property. Staple v Staple, 241 Mich App 562, 580; 616 NW2d 219 (2000).

NO VALUE IN MARITAL HOME

There was no equity and was indeed negative equity in the marital home awarded to the wife, where its appraised value was surpassed by the mortgage and the balance on the home equity line of credit, which the trial court ordered the wife to pay.

ALIMONY TO PAY OFF LINE OF CREDIT

It appeared from the record that the trial court ordered the husband to pay alimony in gross so that plaintiff could use the funds to pay off the balance due on the line of credit, which nearly equaled the amount of alimony.

LIVINGSTON COUNTY DIVORCE COURT GOT IT RIGHT

On the record presented at trial, and given all of the circumstances in the case, there was no inequity in the trial court's decision. Affirmed.

DIVORCE PROPERTY DIVISION CAN BE UNEQUAL

An unequal division of marital property is not contrary to Michigan law as long as it is

based on appropriate criteria. Washington v Washington, 283 Mich App 667, 673; 770 NW2d 908 (2009). Here, the property division favored plaintiff; however, the trial court assessed the relevant factors, and the record supported such findings. Moreover, "there is no Michigan statute or caselaw that precludes outright a substantial deviation from numerical equality in a property distribution award." Id. In this case, the trial determined that the situation did not warrant a 50- 50 property division based upon the property division factors. The trial court did not err in awarding plaintiff $150,000 in alimony in gross. The trial court used its equitable powers to mold relief according to the nature of the case and it did what was necessary to accord complete equity and to conclude the controversy. Cohen v Cohen, 125 Mich App 206, 211; 335 NW2d 661 (1983).



If you have question about Divorce, custody , child support or bankruptcy call Flint Attorney Terry Bankert 1-810-235-1970

http://www.attorneybankert.com/

Appellate court says Van Buren judge did not get the basics right!

THE JUDGE JUST CANNOT SAY MY REFEREE DID A GOOD JOB, THEN CHANGE CUSTODY!
Necessary optimization. Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert today reviews an order to change child custody. Terry Bankert Flint child custody attorney observes as does the Court of Appeals that judges cannot blindly accept the finding of a referee, especialy when custody of a child is changed. For more Flint Family Law attorney articles read the articles posted on the website of Flint Divorce attorney Terry Bankert.

Today’s , 4/4/09,Issues Released 3/26/09 Unpublished:

1.Custody; Fletcher v. Fletcher; Powery v. Wells; Order modifying parenting time; Whether the trial court properly affirmed the referee's decision to modify the established custodial environment based on a preponderance of the evidence; Vodvarka v. Grasmeyer; Terry v. Affum (On Remand);

2. The clear and convincing evidence standard; MCL 722.27(1)(c);

3.Consideration of the best interest factors required by MCL 722.23; Rivette v. Rose-Molina;

4.No contact order between the child and the defendant-mother's current husband
[This opinion has been modified for media presentation.Consult an attorney before you rely on its content.-Terry Bankert]

ejournal summary

The court reversed the trial court's order modifying parenting time and remanded the case because it was not clear whether the referee applied the correct burden of proof (clear and convincing evidence), the failure to definitively use the correct burden of proof constitutes clear legal error, and the trial court erred in failing to consider the best interest factors as required by MCL 722.23.

THE LOWER TRIAL COURT DID WHAT?

The trial court modified parenting time from week on/week off to the defendant-mother having custody every other weekend and entered a no contact order between her current husband and the child.

DAD SAYS I SHOWED CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES!DID THE REFEREE USE THE RIGHT LAW?

While the plaintiff-father established by a preponderance of the evidence there had been a change in circumstances warranting modification of parenting time, it was not clear the referee or the trial court applied the correct burden of proof in determining whether to modify the existing custodial environment.

HIGH COURT TELLS THE JUDGE AND REFEREE TO DO IT RIGHT.

On remand, the referee and the trial court must review the record and determine if plaintiff proved modification of the custody order was in the child's best interest by clear and convincing evidence.

A BEST INTEREST ANALYSIS IN FAMILY LAW IS AS FUNDAMENTAL TO CHANGES IN CUSTODY AS AIR IS TO BREATHING.

Further, neither the referee nor the trial court referenced the statutory best interest factors in their orders. The referee recounted the findings of fact, and both the referee and the trial court summarily stated the custody modification was in the child's best interest because it was neither reasonable to expect, nor possible to ensure compliance, with defendant staying away from her husband every other week.

REFERRING 101 FAILED!

Because there was no reference to the best interest factors either by the referee in his recommendations and order or by the trial court in its order, a remand for findings on the best interest factors was required.

THE TRIAL COURT JUDGE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER

"A mere statement by the trial court that the referee's findings were in the best interests of the child is not a sufficient review of the best interest factors." Reversed and remanded.
–
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S
e-Journal Number: 42269,CHAD S. MAXAM, Plaintiff-Appellee,
UNPUBLISHED,March 26, 2009,v No. 280827,Van Buren Circuit Court
CRYSTAL A. NIEMI, f/k/a CRYSTAL A.SNYDER,
LC No. 02-049876-DC ,Defendant-Appellant., Before: Cavanagh, P.J., and Fort Hood and Davis, JJ.,PER CURIAM.
- snippets of the full case follow, consult an attorney before you rely on this content there have been modifications-

In this child-custody dispute,... We reverse

and remand. This case has been decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).

THERE WAS ABUSE OF DISCRETION

A custody decision is a discretionary ruling that is reviewed under an abuse of discretion
standard. Fletcher v Fletcher, 447 Mich 871, 881; 526 NW2d 889 (1994).
...
Defendant argues the trial court abused its discretion when it affirmed the referee’s
decision to modify the established custodial environment based up a preponderance of the
evidence.

PROPER CAUSE.CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCE, PREPONDERENCE OF EVIDENCE

The trial court may modify or amend a prior parenting time order only for proper cause
shown or because of a change of circumstances. The party seeking the change in parenting time
must prove the change in circumstances by a preponderance of the evidence. Vodvarka v
Grasmeyer, 259 Mich App 499, 509; 675 NW2d 847 (2003); Terry v Affum (On Remand), 237
Mich App 522, 534-535; 603 NW2d 788 (1999).

IF CHANGE PROVEN, CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT THEN CLEAR AND CONVINCING

If a change of circumstances is proven, the trial court must then determine if there is an established custodial environment. If there is, the party seeking to modify the custody order must demonstrate the change is in the child’s best interest by
clear and convincing evidence. MCL 722.27(1)(c), MCL 722.23; Powery, supra at 528; Foskett
v Foskett, 247 Mich App 1, 5-6; 634 NW2d 363 (2001); LaFleche v Ybarra, 242 Mich App 692,
695-696; 619 NW2d 738 (2000).

MOM’S LONG TERM BOYFRIEND IS A SEX OFFENDER

In the instant case, plaintiff established by a preponderance of the evidence that there had
been a change in circumstances warranting modification of parenting time. Vodvarka, supra;
Terry, supra. Plaintiff discovered in April 2006 that defendant’s long-term boyfriend (now
husband) was a registered sex offender. Defendant had knowledge of her husband’s criminal
background for many years but never informed plaintiff of this information.

BUT HE WAS ONLY A MODERATE RISK

Dr. Lemmen, a forensic psychiatrist, testified the husband was at a moderate risk to re-offend. Lemmen stated a CSC sub-specialist would be most qualified to make a risk of recidivism determination.
...
THERE WAS A JOINT CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT THE CHANGE IN PARENTING WOULD CHANGE THE CUSTODY

Next, the referee determined, and neither party disputes, there was an established
custodial environment prior to the instant action. Plaintiff’s requested modification from week
on/week off to defendant having custody every other weekend (and no contact between the child and defendant’s husband) would result in a change in the established custodial environment.

Because of this, plaintiff was required to demonstrate the change is in the child’s best interest by
clear and convincing evidence. MCL 722.27(1)(c), MCL 722.23; Powery, supra; Foskett, supra;
LaFleche, supra.

JUST WHAT BURDEN DID THE REFEREE USE

It is not clear on the record whether the referee in fact applied the correct burden of proof
(clear and convincing evidence) in the determination of whether to modify the existing custodial
environment. The referee noted the appropriate burden, with case citation, in the initial
recommendation and order. However, he mistakenly stated the "preponderance of the evidence" standard in the second recommendation following remand, and did so without case citation.

JUST WHAT BURDEN DID THE JUDGE USE?

Similarly, the trial court failed to indicate which standard it applied when accepting the referee’s
recommendations. Rather, it just found the referee’s recommendations were appropriate and in
the child’s best interests.

CLEAR ERROR ON THE PART OF JUDGE

The failure to definitively use the correct burden of proof constitutes
clear legal error. Powery, supra.

THEY SENT IT BACK AND TOLD THEM TO DO IT RIGHT

On remand, the referee and trial court must review the record
and determine whether plaintiff proved modification of the custody order was in the child’s best
interest by clear and convincing evidence.

JUST HOW DID A FAMILY COURT JUDGE FORGET ABOUT THE BEST INTERESTS

Furthermore, we also find the trial court erred by failing to consider the best interest
factors required by MCL 722.23. Neither the referee nor the trial court referenced the statutory
best interest factors in their orders. Rather, the referee recounted the findings of fact and the
referee and trial court both summarily stated the custody modification was in the child’s best
interest because it was neither reasonable to expect, nor possible to ensure compliance, with
defendant staying away from her husband every other week.

THEY SENT IT BACK AND TOLD THE JUDGE TO DO IT RIGHT

Because there was no reference on the record by either the referee in his recommendations and order, or by the trial court in its order, to the best interest factors, a remand for such findings is required. Rivette v Rose-Molina, 278 Mich App 327, 329-333; 750 NW2d 603 (2008). A mere statement by the trial court that the referee’s findings were in the best interests of the child is not a sufficient review of the best interest factors.
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion. We do not retain
jurisdiction.
/s/ Michael J. Cavanagh
/s/ Karen M. Fort Hood
/s/ Alton T. Davis
Posted here by Terry Bankert

Court will not change Parenting Time

DAD REPORTS TO CPS COURT WILL NOT CHANGE PARENTING TIME

By Terry R. Bankert Attorney At Law. 810-235-1970

As a Flint Divorce Attorney often parents want to change child custody of child parenting time after some bad event occurs. After Legal Representation is sought Lawyers in Flint must be careful to not file motions on issues they cannot prove or that do not rise to a level of importance to justify changes in child custody or child parenting time. The court can cost them money for filing merit less motions.

More importantly that parent will lose credibility which may hurt them in later proceedings. Terry Bankert a Flint family law divorce attorney wrote the following to alert you to sanctions that may occur with frivolous motions.

To find additional article by Bankert goggle "attorneybankert" or "dumpmyspouse"

Issue covered here, (others are in the fullcase):

Whether the fact Child Protective Services (CPS) failed to substantiate evidence of abuse or neglect signified the plaintiff-father's emergency motion totally lacked merit or was not well-grounded in fact; Jerico Constr., Inc. v. Quadrants, Inc.;

DAD FILES EMERGENCY MOTION AFTER MOM ASKED THE COURT TO LIMIT DADS PARENTING TIME.

The parents present dispute arose from a November 2006 motion plaintiff father John David Langlois filed seeking to temporarily suspend defendant's , mother Constance Moore Langlois, parenting time pending the initiation of a CPS investigation into her living conditions, and defendant's motion to limit plaintiff to supervised visitation.

THE COURT APPOINTS A GUARDIAN AD LITEM

The trial court appointed a GAL because it found the parties could not resolve their differences in the child's best interests, and reserved ruling on who would pay the GAL's fees.

APPEALS COURT SAYS OAKLAND COURT GOT IT RIGHT

The Michigan Court of Appeals court concluded the Oakland County trial court did not clearly err in finding plaintiff's motion had a meritorious basis.

CHILD SAYS MOM AND BOY FRIEND SUFFERED DRUNKENNESS, TEACHER REPORTS

Father/ Plaintiff primarily premised the motion on the fact the child had recently reported to school personnel drunkenness and verbal abuse, including threats of harm, by defendant and her fiancé, which prompted a CPS referral. While defendant disputed whether the child reported her concerns to each of the school personnel identified in plaintiff's motion, the parties did not dispute the fact the child made such reports to a teacher, those reports (if true) reflected defendant's home was unfit, and the teacher reported the matter to the CPS.

CPS INVESTIGATED AND COULD NOT FIND/PROVE ANYTHING WRONG

The fact the CPS failed to substantiate evidence of abuse or neglect did not mean plaintiff's emergency motion totally lacked merit or was not well-grounded in fact.

MOM DID NOT SAY DAD OR HIS ATTORNEY DID NOT DO HOMEWORK FIRST

Defendant produced no evidence indicating plaintiff or his attorney failed to make a reasonable inquiry into the circumstances supporting the motion, or at the time they filed the motion, they knew or had reason to believe the child's reports were untrue. Affirmed.
—
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , JOHN DAVID LANGLOIS,
Plaintiff-Appellee,UNPUBLISHED , October 30, 2008, v No. 280764, Oakland Circuit Court
CONSTANCE MOORE LANGLOIS, LC No. 1999-626705-DM, Defendant-Appellant.
e-Journal Number: 40910, Judge(s): Per Curiam - O'Connell, Smolenski, and Gleicher
Before: O’Connell, P.J., and Smolenski and Gleicher, JJ.,PER CURIAM. The lesson here is drawn from this case. Since this posting is for media use, blog, radio etc do not rely on its content without the help of a lawyer or looking at the original document.
___

Defendant HAD filed a motion for sanctions, asserting that plaintiff had filed his November 2006 motion in violation of MCR 2.114(E) and (F).

*A party or the party’s attorney must sign every document that the party files in an action.
MCR 2.114©)(1). That signature constitutes a certification that, among other things, "to the
best of [the signer’s] knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the
document is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good-faith argument for
the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law," and has not been filed "for any
improper purpose." MCR 2.114(D)(2), (3).

*A document signed in violation of subrule (D) subjects the signer, "a represented party, or both" to sanctions, including reasonable attorney fees. MCR 2.114(E). The imposition of a sanction becomes mandatory on a "finding that a pleading was signed in violation of the court rule."1 Contel Systems Corp v Gores, 183 Mich App 706, 710-711; 455 NW2d 398 (1990).

*"To impose a sanction under MCR 2.114(E), the trial court must first find that an
attorney or party has signed a pleading in violation of MCR 2.114(A)-(D)." In re Stafford, 200
Mich App 41, 42; 503 NW2d 678 (1993). Such a determination "depends largely on the facts
and circumstances of the claim." Id. A trial court’s determination that a party violated the court
rule involves a finding of fact by the trial court. Contel Systems, supra at 711.

*The circuit court in this case did not clearly err in finding that plaintiff’s motion had a
meritorious basis. Plaintiff premised the motion primarily on the fact that the parties’ child had
recently reported to school personnel drunkenness and verbal abuse, including threats of harm,
by defendant and her fiancé, which prompted a referral to CPS.

* Although defendant disputed whether the child had reported her concerns to each of the school personnel identified in plaintiff’s motion, the parties did not dispute that the child had made such reports to a teacher, that those reports, if true, reflected that defendant’s home was unfit, and that the teacher reported the matter to CPS.

* That CPS failed to substantiate evidence of neglect or abuse does not signify
that plaintiff’s emergency motion entirely lacked merit or was not well-grounded in fact. Jerico
Constr, Inc v Quadrants, Inc, 257 Mich App 22, 36; 666 NW2d 310 (2003) ("That the alleged
facts are later discovered to be untrue does not invalidate a prior reasonable inquiry.").

*Defendant presented no evidence to suggest that plaintiff or his attorney failed to make a
reasonable inquiry into the circumstances supporting the motion or that, at the time they filed the motion, they knew or had reason to believe that the child’s reports were untrue. Defendant thus failed to show that plaintiff’s emergency motion as a whole was signed in violation of the court rule.

Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://attorneybankert.com/

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS IN MICHIGAN DIVORCE

FLINT DIVORCE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
What is a temporary restraining order from a Flint County Family Court?
Requirements for a Flint Divorce Attorney seeking and the court granting a temporary restraining order (TRO): Flint Fathers Rights , Childrens Rights and Flint Mothers Rights equally apply.
It clearly appears from specific facts, as Prepared by a Flint Divorce Lawyer, shown in an affidavit or a verified pleading that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the applicant from the delay required to effect notice, or that notice itself will precipitate adverse action before an order can be entered.
The applicant’s Flint Attorney certifies in writing any efforts to give notice and why notice should not be required.
A permanent record , By A Flint Family Court Judge, is made of non written evidence, arguments, or representations supporting the application. A record is what is done in front of a Flint Family Court Judge after the case is called. The record is produced by ordering transcripts.
The order, prepared by your Flint Divorce attorney, must be (1) endorsed with the date and time it is issued, (2) describe the injury and why it is irreparable, and (3) state why the order was granted without notice.
Domestic relations TROs (unlike others) need not expire within a fixed period, and the court need not set a date for further hearing.
Motions for Temporary Orders as prepared by your Flint Divorce Lawyer outline follows;

A Flint Lawyer will prepare your Motions for temporary orders . Flint attorney pleadings typically concern Flint child custody and Flint support, Flint parenting time adjustments, marital restraints on distributing property, residence in the marital home, sometimes called exclusive use of the marital home, and requests for Flint attorney fees.
A Flint Lawyer’ s motion for a temporary order differs from an ex parte order in that it may not be granted without a hearing, unless the parties agree otherwise. MCR 3.207©)(2).
The motion may be made , by your Flint Legal Counsel, at any time during the pendency of a case by filing a verified motion setting forth facts sufficient to support the relief requested. MCR 3.207©)(1).
Other provisions regarding the Flint Divorce temporary order include the following:
The Flint Divorce order may be modified at any time, following a hearing and on a showing of good cause.
The Flint Divorce order must state its effective date and whether it may be modified retroactively by a subsequent order.
The Flint Divorce order remains in effect until modified or until entry of the final judgment or order.
The Flint Divorce Temporary order vacated by entry of the final judgment or order, unless specifically continued or preserved. An exception is support arrearage that have been assigned to the state.
MCR 3.207©)(3)–(6).
Your Flint Judge may not grant exclusive use of the marital home to one party in the absence of evidence of abusive conduct, a risk of physical harm, or conduct detrimental psychologically or emotionally to the children. That the petitioner is "uncomfortable" with the living arrangement probably does not justify depriving the other party of a residence.
At any time, a Flint Divorce party may request that the court order the other party to pay all or part of the attorney fees and expenses related to the action or a specific proceeding, including a Flint post judgment proceeding. The motion must allege facts sufficient to show that the petitioner is unable to bear the expense and that the other party is able to pay. Alternatively, the motion must allege facts sufficient to show that the fees and expenses were incurred because the other party was able to comply with a previous court order but refused. MCR 3.206©).
Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://attorneybankert.com/
and
http://dumpmyspouse.com

Dealing with divorce.

Just think about all the time you spend meeting, courting, getting to know your spouse.

The investment of time and energy in meeting family and friends. The emotional investment in planning and performing the marriage. The dreams of stability and family. We expect marriage to be permanent. Divorce changes everything our relationships with children , family and friends. Divorcing or saying to your self you want to Dump My Souse (dumpmyspouse) is the beginning of a new path in your life.

ENDING A MARRIAGE

Divorce may bet the only option. But unless it is simply and uncontested this ending of romance and partnership will emotionally impact both spouses.

Divorce is the process of getting into court to end a partnership. Divorcing is an emotional process of healing and building your self up emotionally.


WHO IS TERRY BANKERT?

Our marking though these key words and concepts allows us to bring a message to you.

Terry Bankert is a Flint Divorce Lawyer attorney. His practice issues involve Child custody, child support, fathers and mothers parenting times. The parents should attempt to cooperate. He is described as a Flint attorney, Genesee County lawyer, Clio attorney, Burton lawyer, Davidson attorney, Flushing lawyer, military divorce attorney, Flint lawyer, Michigan attorney, Flint alimony, Flint fathers rights, Flint mothers rights.

Often the emotions of the parents takes the emotional hurt to the children. Please do all you can to keep your hurt from the children. Bankert also represents parents in several other issue areas. They are; Flint grandparents rights, Flint paternity attorney ,Flint Child visitation Lawyer, Bankert is a Flint spousal support attorney , one of the Flint lawyers, or Flint attorneys, he handles Flint guardianship,he prectices exclusively in Flint family court.

Often people in divorce only look at their own emotions. We should also consider , Flint childrens rights, and Flint parents rights.

There are ways to settle your issues privately through Flint mediation and Flint collaborative law. Once an order is entered you may need help getting what is yours. You can ask for Flint child support collection, Flint divorce judgement enforcement, and Flint judgement changes. Some divorces have few issues not resolved by the parties. You may have a Flint uncontested divorce , and you may agree on Flint child support payment. Call and ask about Flint simple divorce, at our Flint Law Firm, law.

Bankert practices Law in the court rooms of Judge Duncan Beagle, Judge Michael Theile, Judge David Newblatt, Judge John Gadola, Judge Robert E. Weiss. Terry Bankert can be found by googling his name terrybankert or , attorneybankert , Bankert can also be found at the internet sites, findlaw, lawyers com, dumpmyspouse, terrybankert blogspot.

The Emotional Process of Divorce

Many feel a predictable range of emotions through the divorce process. These emotions range from denial, rage, futility, rebuilding, hope and building for the future.

You attorney will tell you the process stages of divorce. But what are the emotional stages? Know you are not alone. 50% of the population divorces. It may help for you to know the emotional stages of divorce and how most people emotionally react. What then are the emotional steps of divorce?

GENERALLY

1.facing the reality of the divorce
2.working through painful feelings
3.experiencing the full range of emotions associated with the breakdown of a marriage
4.coping with the situational and lifestyle changes resulting from loss
5.adapting to the change, and reconfiguring life

A."Shock and Disbelief" begins as soon as the idea of a separation and divorce is introduced and sinks in. It involves four major tasks and issues to be worked through.
Facing reality
Self esteem and inadequacy
Telling the world
Support and help
B. "Initial Adjustment" involves the ability of people to actively adapt to this new phase of their lives. The primary goal of this stage is adaptation and mustering the personal resources needed to manage the many emotional and practical changes faced by people during this phase of their divorce work, and tasks include:
Functioning and responsibility
Practical reality
Legal Matters
Managing emotions
C. "Active Re-organization" centers around how people live their lives and cope with the tasks of being suddenly single. Major tasks to be dealt with and worked through include:
Managing life style and practical affairs
Re-defining relationships
Reconstructing personal values and beliefs
Concluding legal procedures
D. "Life Re-formation" represents the final steps as readers pass through to the "other" side of their divorce. During this stage people deal with the emotional issues and life choices involved as they move on with their lives.
Constructing relationships
New interests
Personal responsibility
Accepting your new life
SO HOW DO YOU HANDLE DIVORCE
" Shock and disbelief typically passes the most quickly. It's the quick hit, and sometimes numbing shock wave, as people realize their marriage is over. Follow your heart, create a support group but be concerned about your children. Your "Initial Adjustment" and " Active Re-organization" are the most active times for you this includes the legal divorce process active legal, practical, and emotional changes in your life. The final process " life Re - formation" stage represents that time in life during which husband and wife are moving far away from their divorce, and into their new life. This time has no formal "end," and is marked by the full acceptance of the divorce and a resolution of most of the practical issues and many of the emotional.
You are not in this alone.


Source
Rich,Phil Ed.D., MSW at
http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/articles/divorce/fourstages.html

Womans Divorce
http://www.womansdivorce.com/healing.html
Healing from Divorce
http://www.alovelinksplus.com/advice/rhonda_findling/healing-from-divorce.htm