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
© 2024 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 AllPike Fuels Agrees to Pay $2 Million Settlement to Resolve Alleged New Haven Environmental Violations
2 minute readHigh-Flying Genetics Testing Firm GeneDx Hires Ex-Zoetis GC as Legal Chief
2 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Business Breakups: Why Business and Commercial Cases Are Well-Suited to Mediation
- 2Prosecutors Drop Charges Against Ex-Miami Commissioner and Attorney
- 3Pennsylvania Modernizes Trust Administration With New Directed Trust Statute
- 4Farella Hires Former AUSA, Jan. 6 Prosecutor
- 5Dougherty Jury Returns $2M Verdict
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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