jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
Does anyone on this site have experience with designation of an attorney-in fact by a party wishing to file a divorce? Would this relieve the party granting the power of attorney of any further responsibility in the matter, unless deposed by the other party's attorney?
Could a party holding any appropriate power of attorney, for another, exercise this power to begin any legal action on behalf of the grantor of said power of attorney (the "principal")? Specifically, in his capacity as attorney-in-fact, could the holder of such power of attorney sue himself, personally, for divorce, on behalf of the grantor?
My state is Texas. All informarion will be appreciated.
|
Jada
Platinum
Reged: 06/02/07
Posts: 2891
|
|
Any one sided divorce settlement that was not personally signed by BOTH parties is probably not going to be upheld on appeal. Even if the appeal is years later.
I know of someone who's divorce judgement was reversed because her ex (who wasn't at the trial, completely missed the process) decided he didn't like what the judge ordered. And appealed a couple of years after the fact. While they are still divorced, the financial issues regarding the assets are now being revisited.
You are not going to be able to get away with tricking your wife into giving you power of attorney and then filing for divorce on her behalf. And give yourself everything.
There isn't a judge who would even remotely see that as fair. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there was some type of manipulation going on.
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
===========================================================
You are not going to be able to get away with tricking your wife into giving you power of attorney and then filing for divorce on her behalf. And give yourself everything.
===========================================================
I was specifically thinking of Texas "default" divorce law which provides that, BY LAW, if the party being divorced does not respond in any way--to any communication from the court--a default judgement is issued after 90 days, and then becomes final. Both parties keep whatever they presently have, by title or possession.
Of course any motion for "discovery" would require a response, but I would have no intention of filing such a motion, researching my own assets on behalf of my wife, or otherwise assuming that there was an "adversarial" relationship between myself as her attorney-in-fact, and myself, personally!
What's wrong with that?
Edited by jbar (05/09/08 02:51 AM)
|
Jada
Platinum
Reged: 06/02/07
Posts: 2891
|
|
You aren't going to get away with it. A judge simply isn't going to let you represent your wife in the divorce. MAJOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST there.
Not only that, the judge will LET YOUR WIFE KNOW WHAT HER RIGHTS ARE. And then your wife will then learn just how you have been abusing her all of this time. And you will be going through discovery whether you want to or not.
On second thought, go ahead and do it.
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
===========================================================
You aren't going to get away with it. A judge simply isn't going to let you represent your wife in the divorce. MAJOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST there
===========================================================
Who's to say what her "interest" is? It could be in her interest to simply get out of the marriage, with whatever she presently has, and to avoid courts and lawyers.
If she is willing to sign such a power of attorney, before a notary, then to the best of my knowledge the judge is required, by law, to approve the divorce. No "attorney ad-litum" would be required, to "protect her interests", as her original, genuine attorney-in-fact (myself) is standing in front of the court!
Edited by jbar (05/09/08 02:45 AM)
|
Jada
Platinum
Reged: 06/02/07
Posts: 2891
|
|
You simply aren't going to be allowed to sign for your wife in your divorce.
There isn't a judge who would allow it. She could have begged that you sign for the divorce, a judge still won't allow it.
You aren't going to be able to cheat your wife out of her share of the marital assets unless she gives it all to you. And for a judge to accept that, there has to be full disclosure and SHE HAS TO PERSONALLY TELL A JUDGE THAT IT SHE DID INDEED SIGN THE AGREEMENT AND THAT SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT SHE IS SIGNING AWAY(after being told that she may have done worse or better had the decision been left up to him. And if there isn't an attorney present for your wife, the judge just may tell your wife what she is legally entitled to).
One day, your wife will get fed up. And you will have to pay her for her share of the marital assets.
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
I'd like to see what someone with a little more credibility, and less hysteria, has to say about this before I go back to the drawing board. In the mean time I intend to move forward in this direction.
If a person can be "pro-se", then why can't another individual, whether an attorney or not, be given power-of attorney to represent him as long as he receives no pay?
|
Jada
Platinum
Reged: 06/02/07
Posts: 2891
|
|
Go and ask an attorney. S/he will tell you the same thing. A judge won't allow you to sign for your wife in the divorce, even with a power of attorney.
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
===========================================================
Go and ask an attorney. S/he will tell you the same thing. A judge won't allow you to sign for your wife in the divorce, even with a power of attorney.
===========================================================
Why should I believe an attorney, when s/he has everything to lose and nothing to gain, if someone is "pro-se" instead of employing his services? What is the difference between being pro-se and authorizing someone else to represent you, as long as he doesn't get paid? Go look at Nolo.com if you don't believe that this happens all of the time.
The idea is to dismiss all greedy lawyers, and their behaviour which relentlessly attempts to pit the parties in any legal action against each other, when all the parties really want is simply to agree to a settlement ON THEIR OWN TERMS and without getting third parties, WITH A VESTED INTEREST IN CREATING AN ADVERSARIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEM, involved. NO ONE has the right to insist that anyone must disclose to the world everything that they have before they may agree to make, or to mutually rescind, any contract. Any fool who maintains that the state has the right to invade individual privacy in this way has my official permission to go to blazes.
If not myself, therefore, why not someone else to do this for her, WHO WOULD NOT HAVE ANY FINANCIAL INTEREST in the matter, as all lawyers MUST? I can think of a number of business associates and family friends who would probably be happy to be her attorney-in-fact, proceed as I have described, and thereby help us both. The procedure that they would follow is clearly spelled out, in detail, in any of the "Do-it yourself" no-fault, Default Divorce manuals.
Unless you have some citations to offer, I believe I have heard about enough on this subject from you, jada, for now. Unless someone more authoritative is willing to contribute something here I will do a little more research, myself, and then will most likely proceed.
Edited by jbar (05/10/08 12:17 AM)
|
allthumbs
Platinum
Reged: 07/12/07
Posts: 243
|
|
I cannot speak for Texas law, but here in CA, while in individual can get power of attorney for another, it doesn't help them in family court because in court, the court will not allow a person without a license to practice law, speak on another's behalf. So when someone is pro per, they must speak for themselves. Power of attorney here only allows a limited amount of "power". Here, you would need a license to practice law, to represent a person before the court.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
