Lifson Law: Blog
In a new application of an old theme, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reiterated the basic concept of interpreting an agreement of the parties with regard to a spouse’s pension benefit. In Pulliam v. Pulliam, filed on April 29, 2015, the Court held that a consent judgment was unambiguous and that all elements of the Husband’s pension benefit are to be included in the transfer to Wife of her marital share of Husband’s pension.
In the aftermath of the 2015 session of the Maryland General Assembly, we naturally focus our attention on bills passed by the Assembly and signed by the Governor. But as we sift through the accomplishments of our elected officials, it is always important to consider the bills that did not pass and the problems that may ensue without adjustment to our Code.
When parents of minor children live in separate households, providing for children’s financial needs can become especially challenging. Occasionally, the press reports on studies that calculate the financial cost of raising a child until legal adulthood, and to most of us, the number of dollars is enormous. Still, children need to be fed, clothed, sheltered, and cared for when parents are at work. The basic health insurance needs of children must also be addressed.
The 2015 session of the Maryland General Assembly ended with the enrollment of a bill that will soon generate a quiet revolution in the practice of family law. Governor Hogan has not officially signed it, but HB 472 (Family Law-Grounds for Divorce-Mutual Consent) is likely to be approved and go into effect on October 1, 2015.
Translating thoughts into language that will be interpreted by our courts and that will ultimately affect the lives of our citizens can be difficult.
Following the December 2014 release of the final report of the Commission on Child Custody Decision Making, the Maryland General Assembly is now evaluating bills to address children in custody cases.