Why Online Services Are Insufficient When Filing for Divorce
Choosing between traditional and technological methods of divorce is not just about price.
June 27, 2019 at 03:09 PM
5 minute read
Photo: Shutterstock
Divorce can be simultaneously one of the most emotional and detail-oriented matters a person will go through in their lifetime. The increasing embrace of the digital world for cost- and time-saving online forms for divorce demonstrate how essential services of a family law attorney are for making sure a divorce is sufficiently handled. Unlike online forms, divorce can never be considered “one size fits all.” The available online forms are cookie-cutter and too generic.
Many different types of people get divorced. The only marriage an online divorce may work for are those whose marriage was short and that also have zero retirement, zero assets, zero property and zero children. For these marriages, an online form may be cheaper than hiring an attorney. However, this assumes the divorcing parties are savvy enough to comply with both the Family Code and applicable court rules. If not, one risks showing up to court to finalize their divorce only to be told by the court that they need to start over at square one. Even in these situations, it is often cheaper and faster to hire an attorney to do the job right.
A quick search of Facebook, Craiglist or even Google will show countless sources offering “cheap, quick and easy online divorces.” Oftentimes they go by names such as notarios. This is to prey on the immigrant communities, who often do not realize that in the United States, notarios are not licensed to practice law. These services may claim that you can get a divorce for as little as $250. This is common in Harris County, which is strange, considering the filing fee for a divorce in that county is more than that. Unfortunately for people who fall prey to these scams, it usually costs more to clean up the mess.
One of the first steps in filing for divorce is often what trips up people trying to do it without an attorney. This is the issue of service. In a divorce, just like in any civil case, the petitioner must serve the respondent with the petition. They must provide proof to the court of this with a return citation filed with the court. Improper execution of this step will prevent the divorce from finalizing. Often, the respondent can't be found or is actively hiding. In these situations, I've yet to find a non-attorney who could navigate the procedural waters alone. Here again, both time and money could be saved by simply hiring an attorney.
Sometimes spouses agree to divorce and even agree on how to divide their assets. If a couple is in this scenario and one spouse suggests using an online form, this raises a major red flag. Is the spouse hiding assets? Are they trying to claim separate property that should be community property? In most marriages, one spouse manages the finances more than the other. There may also be educational or professional advantages one party has over the other. An attorney will be able to map the community estate and identify any separate property. If the agreement is truly as fair as the spouse makes it seem, this will be quickly verified by consulting with an attorney. Simply dividing assets without a professional involved is a slippery slope. Often these types of divorces end up being reopened by the court, if the injured party is able to hire an attorney in enough time after the fact. Once this happens, these cases become very expensive for the litigants.
Perhaps the worst scenario to use online forms and services is if you have children. These forms are simply insufficient when it comes to child custody issues. In fact, one district judge likes to refer to these types of orders as “suggestions.” These forms do not address the myriad of child custody issues that families deal with today. Oftentimes this doesn't come back to bite you until it's too late. For example, the parties divorce and have child custody orders stating that all health decisions are joint. Fast forward a few years and there is a dispute between the now ex-spouses over their child's health. Who wins? The answer is often nobody. For these situations, the individuals would need to hire attorneys and likely file for a modification. They would need to litigate that issue before the court. This is taxing, both financially and mentally, especially when these issues should have been addressed in the original divorce.
Nobody wants to spend money on an attorney. The desire to save money is understandable. However, the risks involved in using a form to file for divorce make hiring or consulting with an attorney necessary. If children are involved, using an attorney should be considered mandatory. For those who still decide on going the online route, expect to do what they originally wanted to avoid—spending money on an attorney. However, this time it's much more.
Matt Tyson of The Law Office of Matt Tyson maintains his practice in Houston and surrounding areas. Focusing primarily on family law, in addition he works on criminal defense. Contact him at [email protected] or visit www.tysonfamilylaw.com.
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 All![From Hospital Bed to Legal Insights: Lessons in Life, Law, and Lawyering From Hospital Bed to Legal Insights: Lessons in Life, Law, and Lawyering](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/texaslawyer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/401/2022/11/maslanka-michael-p-19-767x633.jpg)
From Hospital Bed to Legal Insights: Lessons in Life, Law, and Lawyering
6 minute read![It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/texaslawyer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/401/2023/07/John-Browning-767x633.jpg)
![Nondisparagement Clauses in Divorce: Balancing Family Harmony and Free Speech Nondisparagement Clauses in Divorce: Balancing Family Harmony and Free Speech](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/texaslawyer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/403/2023/12/Reiter-Pollack-Siegel_2-767x633.jpg)
Nondisparagement Clauses in Divorce: Balancing Family Harmony and Free Speech
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1CFPB Labor Union Files Twin Lawsuits Seeking to Prevent Agency's Closure
- 2Crypto Crime Down, Hacks Up: Lawyers Warned of 2025 Security Shake-Up
- 3Atlanta Calling: National Law Firms Flock to a ‘Hotbed for Talented Lawyers’
- 4Privacy Suit Targets Education Department Over Disclosure of Student Financial Data to DOGE
- 5Colwell Law Group Founder Has Died in Skiing Accident
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