What is the name of your state? LA
This question applies to my brother in law's situation but I also happen to be very curious about it.
I found the following at a site on Louisiana law
We are frequently asked the question "Why not just have both parties agree that there was adultery if they want a quick divorce?"
The answer to that is clear. There has to be independent proof of the adultery. Otherwise, the divorce is considered collusive and will not be granted.
If I am understanding this right, it doesn't matter if my brother in law and sister in law go into court and she says "he cheated on me, he admitted it" (he did) and he says "yes, I did", they would still have to have real proof, correct?
Weird. But since she has no real proof and it sounds as if the court won't take his word for it, they'll have to sit out the waiting period.
This question applies to my brother in law's situation but I also happen to be very curious about it.
I found the following at a site on Louisiana law
We are frequently asked the question "Why not just have both parties agree that there was adultery if they want a quick divorce?"
The answer to that is clear. There has to be independent proof of the adultery. Otherwise, the divorce is considered collusive and will not be granted.
If I am understanding this right, it doesn't matter if my brother in law and sister in law go into court and she says "he cheated on me, he admitted it" (he did) and he says "yes, I did", they would still have to have real proof, correct?
Weird. But since she has no real proof and it sounds as if the court won't take his word for it, they'll have to sit out the waiting period.