Split Decisions

Divorce and consequences

With the spread of marital breakups, divorce American-style is cracking open a widening set of legal problems. Divorce is now a simple enough procedure in almost every state. But as three quite different recent cases show, the consequences of the split can challenge the creativity of the courts.

Take the question of who should get what after Mark and Janet Sullivan parted. During most of their ten-year marriage, Janet, now 35, worked while Mark trained to be a doctor. Then in 1978, just before Mark set up his urology practice, Janet moved out, and divorce followed. As the couple divided up property, Janet sought standard items like furniture and one of the two cars. But one thing on her list stopped Mark cold: a partial interest in his medical degree. For her support, Janet reasoned, she should receive a percentage of the $660,000 that she says is the added money he will earn as a urologist. A state appeals court in San Bernardino ruled that she has a point, and professionals up and down California are wondering if the case could affect them some day.

In its decision, the three-judge panel noted that Mark is paying $250 a month to help support the couple's daughter, who divides her time between parents. But there was no question of alimony because Janet's salary enables her to maintain the standard of living she had while married. So the value of her support of Mark's studies could be measured only in the property settlement. The court refused to rule that the degree was "community property," which in California is split equally, but it did reason that Janet's sizable investment in Mark's education entitled her to at least part of its value. A trial judge will determine the amount.

Mark, who plans to appeal, took to the Op-Ed page of the Los Angeles Times to argue that he had contributed his share of support by working while at school. Queried Mark: "What if I am lucky enough to win a Nobel Prize? Would she be entitled to part of the prize money?"

Though the decision broke new ground in California, Janet is not the first supporting spouse to win compensation. A number of courts, using various theories, have rewarded similar efforts with a larger share of the couple's property or more alimony. In most cases, however, the courts have reimbursed the wife only for what she contributed to help her husband get his degree. That is inadequate, insists New York Attorney Doris Jonas Freed, an expert on matrimonial law. Says she: "It is unfair to limit the compensation to just what the wife has spent without considering the enhancement of the husband's earning power." The California court took that extra step, and if the ruling withstands appeal, that state's precedent should prompt others to follow.

Questions of property are hard fought, but quarrels over who keeps the children can be even rougher. A solution that has been gaining acceptance is joint custody, now available in some 20 states. Perhaps the ultimate in sharing was put together last month by Circuit Judge Charles Forster in Traverse City, Mich. Cheryl and Allan Church may go their separate ways, he said, but their three teen-age boys in a sense will get custody of the house. Under the plan, the ex-mates will move in and out each month. For the Churches, at least, the arrangement is perfect. Says Cheryl: "Nobody's a loser."

Children sometimes have other rights that can come into play during a divorce. When her parents broke up in 1979, Adrienne Zimmerman, now 23, sided with her mother. She says that her choice angered her father Theodore, a New York attorney, and that he consequently reneged on a promise to pay her college tuition. Dismissed from Adelphi University after her junior year because she owed $6,700, Adrienne sued her dad, claiming she had been harmed by his failure to honor his pledge. Last month a state appeals court ordered him to pay up. Though pleased by the decision, Adrienne, now a bookkeeper, concedes that money isn't everything. Says she: "I want a father." Unfortunately, that problem--and the deep pain that causes most of these lawsuits--is beyond the power of even the most creative judge.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.