It's Easier Than Ever to Get Divorced in Connecticut. But Are Couples Reconsidering Amid COVID-19 Uncertainties?
A new executive order by Gov. Ned Lamont will make it easier for couples to proceed in getting an uncontested divorce. The question remains: Given the COVID-19 climate, will couples take advantage of the new rules?
May 06, 2020 at 04:32 PM
4 minute read
As COVID-19 forced the courts to change how they do business, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont issued an executive order allowing parties to proceed with uncontested divorces via affidavit, as opposed to having to take part in in-person court requirements.
But some attorneys are raising questions, suggesting COVID-19 might lead couples to change their minds about divorce, as new economic uncertainties come into play.
On one hand, family law attorneys are applauding Lamont's Executive Order 7CC, saying it could help litigants move quickly to avoid what might seem like untenable living arrangements.
"This will have a big effect on family law attorneys and will be very helpful to couples seeking a divorce, as 90% of cases resolve without the need for trial," said Paul McConnell of Hartford-based McConnell Family Law Group. "It's unanimous among the family law attorneys I've spoken to. They all agree it's a good move."
But other lawyers aren't convinced.
'Take care of each other'
New York divorce attorney Dror Bikel, author of "The 1% Divorce — Clash of Titans" and "The Wall Street Divorce," predicts that many couples will change their mind.
"People are definitely rethinking divorces in our COVID-19 world," said Bikel, who's practiced family law for almost 25 years, and is the founding partner of Bikel and Schanfield in Manhattan.
Bikel said seven clients decided to back down: three reconsidering before filing, and four rethinking after submitting divorce petitions. In one instance, a policeman and his wife wanted to separate before the uncertainty of the pandemic.
"They had a baby and the wife was not working," Bikel said. "Neither party wanted the wife and child not to be on the New York Police Department insurance plan. They are working it out. They decided to go into therapy."
That couple is not alone, the attorney said.
"I'd say, from talking to fellow family law practitioners, that 30-50% of people who were going to get a divorce will now not do it," Bikel said. "It's just more expensive to get a divorce today. People are having more economic stressors. … It costs more money to carry two households with two rents and two mortgages. People are reengineering their priorities, and when you do that, you think of what is important in life. People are saying they need to take care of each other in these times."
Potential pitfall?
But family law attorney Eric Higgins, co-managing partner with Wofsey Rosen Kweskin & Kuriansky in Stamford predicts the opposite result in Connecticut—and good news for lawyers—after the governor's executive order.
"It may start to move some business that might have otherwise been stalled," Higgins said.
But Higgins foresees a potential pitfall. He said some could argue that the governor exceeded his authority in granting the executive order in the first place.
"It's an open question on whether the governor has the authority to do what he did," the attorney said. "There could be a potential separation-of-powers issue with this, because the [legislators] are the only ones that can modify or pass statutes. There is a concern that someone who gets divorced using this process can then attack it later. They can say they didn't appear in court in person, and therefore the divorce should be void because the statute requires them to appear in court."
Related stories:
Do Marital Settlement Agreements Need a Force Majeure Provision?
Shared Custody in the Time of COVID-19: A Q&A With Susan Myres
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEMT Qualifies as 'Health Care Provider' Under Whistleblower Act, State Appellate Court Rules
4 minute readInherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Latham's Lateral Hiring Picks Up Steam, With Firm Adding Simpson Practice Head, Private Equity GC
- 2Legal Restrictions Governing Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace
- 3Failure to Adequately Inform Patients
- 4'FTX' One Year Later: The Impact on Examiner Practice in Bankruptcy Courts
- 5Gen AI Legal Contract Startup Ivo Announces $16 Million Series A Funding Round
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250