To Lie or Not to Lie in Divorce Matters
Although lying may appear to be rampant in our society, in divorce matters, lying is unacceptable.
November 14, 2019 at 02:00 PM
5 minute read
The legal system is based on everyone, lawyers and litigants alike, telling the truth. Litigants take oaths to tell the truth. Lawyers take oaths to tell the truth and to uphold a code of ethics which directs lawyers to show "candor to the tribunal" and not make misrepresentations. Lying is never acceptable.
In 2004, a book called "The Cheating Culture" was published, where the author posited that stress from economic inequality has corroded moral values resulting in a "winner take all" philosophy such that people cheat, i.e., lie in all areas of life—sports, business, law, academics, journalism, entertainment and medicine. What is upsetting about this book and events which continue to catch our attention with the 24-hour news cycle, is that lying can be seen as a way to use the legal system to one's advantage to "get it over" on the other side.
All too often, litigants going through divorce, where emotions run high and can overtake good judgment and common sense, will lie to their lawyers, to their spouse, as well as the court. A not infrequent example is when a client comes in and tells a lawyer that he has cash which he does not want his spouse to know about. Once that revelation is made, a lawyer must tell the client that he must reveal this asset or the lawyer cannot represent him. A lawyer cannot assist a client in committing perjury (lying to the court when he reveals his assets). Either the client agrees to reveal the cash or, he does not hire that lawyer, goes to another lawyer, and does not reveal the cash. This scenario perpetrates a lie upon the court and the spouse. Since the existence of cash is often very difficult to prove without spending a large amount of money on a forensic accountant, the litigant who is willing to lie about possessing cash (or lie by omission) is able to reap the benefit of the lie.
Recently, I began thinking about the frequency of lying we see around us which the media is all too ready to report. Some people get away with it, while others are penalized. In divorce matters, lying is never acceptable, but in society, it happens so often that the act of lying has become part of our culture.
Take, for example, the case of Jussie Smollett. Jussie Smollett allegedly staged an attack by two men to appear that he was the victim of an anti-gay and racist assault because he was unhappy with his salary on the show "Empire." Within two months, all charges he made were dismissed because they were untrue. He lost his job on "Empire," and the city of Chicago is suing him for reimbursement of $130,000 for the overtime spent investigating the false charges.
Then, there is Michael Cohen who was caught lying to Congress about a real estate deal President Trump and his company pursued while Trump was campaigning for the Republican nomination.
And, most recently, the college admissions scandals exposed people with money and power who bought their children's admission to prestigious schools based on illegal payments and fraudulent resumes of the student.
Who can forget the sad story of Tawana Brawley, who falsely accused three policemen and a prosecutor of raping her and smearing racial slurs on her body? Only when a Grand Jury found that she may have staged the appearance of an attack did the public view of Brawley and her adviser, Al Sharpton, change. The prosecutor, Steven Pagones, filed a defamation lawsuit again her, Sharpton, and her attorneys, which resulted in a $345,000 verdict against Sharpton and his advisers, and a $185,000 verdict against Brawley. Brawley is paying off the debt by her wages being garnished.
Also, the young woman who falsely accused members of the Duke lacrosse team of assault, which resulted in three boys leaving Duke, and the overzealous prosecutor who was running for reelection being disbarred for making false statements before a judge and withholding exculpatory evidence from the other side.
All of these news stories are about people who hoped to gain an advantage in the legal system or hoped to absolve themselves of their misdeeds by lying. When viewed through the lens of a court, liars will suffer consequences. In a divorce matter, the same is true.
The failure to tell the truth in a divorce case results in one spouse failing to deal fairly with the other. In theory, the dissolution of a marriage should be equitable and fair. Litigants should expect to have a fair and equitable outcome, and to be treated with civility by the court and with honesty by their spouses. Although our society shines a light on sensational stories of liars, and the consequences they face, litigants going through a divorce should never consider lying as a benefit to their cases. The court and the lawyers in a divorce matter need to be ethical and remind their clients that only the truth will make for a fair resolution of their case, and a civilized dissolution of their marriage.
Bonnie C. Frost is a partner at Einhorn, Barbarito, Frost & Botwinick in Denville.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 AllSend Us Your New Partners for the NJ Law Journal's New Partners Yearbook
1 minute readNew Methods for Clients and Families to Have Their Estate and Legacy Planning Complete
5 minute readTensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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