• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Blameshifting

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

gryndor

Member
What is the name of your state?Ca

Blameshifting is confusing the hell out of every thread that he/she posts to. BS is always at odds with the common consensus and it's making it very hard (at least for me) to follow the legalities of the issues.

Like in this thread:

https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=188565

Q: What is the difference between Permanent Separation and Legal Separation? IS there a difference?


and then there's this thread...

https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=188688

WTF?
 
Last edited:


BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
He won't be here much longer.

As for the legal separation thread, it's been resolved.

The other thread is pure BS if you'll read it.
 
B

blameshifting

Guest
gryndor said:
What is the name of your state?Ca

Blameshifting is confusing the hell out of every thread that he/she posts to. BS is always at odds with the common consensus and it's making it very hard (at least for me) to follow the legalities of the issues.

Like in this thread:

https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=188565

Q: What is the difference between Permanent Separation and Legal Separation? IS there a difference?


and then there's this thread...

https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=188688

WTF?
Yes, there is a difference between legal separation and permanent separation in California.

By WTF are you saying you don't understand why someone in California who builds their fence on their neighbors property 50 years ago isn't likely obligated to remove that fence.

What "consensus" are you referring to? The consensus of a few long time posters who get their feelings hurt anytime someone corrects them?
 
B

blameshifting

Guest
BelizeBreeze said:
He won't be here much longer.

As for the legal separation thread, it's been resolved.

The other thread is pure BS if you'll read it.
How was it "resolved"? By one of your "you're wrong but I'm sure not going to explain why because I don't actually know why" tantrums?

Yes, the other thread was pure BS. You advised some poor soul to go tear down their neighbors fence despite the fact that the fence had been there for 50 years.
 

gryndor

Member
.
WTF refers to:

gryndor said:
Blameshifting is confusing the hell out of every thread that he/she posts to. BS is always at odds with the common consensus and it's making it very hard (at least for me) to follow the legalities of the issues.
blameshifting said:
What "consensus" are you referring to? The consensus of a few long time posters who get their feelings hurt anytime someone corrects them?
When everyone says "no," but you say "yes," with half of an explanation, that is what I was talking about when I said you were going against the common consensus.

BTW, those "long time posters" have been giving sound advise for long enough that their words count for a little more. When the new kid on the block shows up and starts discrediting established people in the neighborhood, guess who believes who.

I mean look at me. I have only 76 posts. I am nobody. You have 150, you are nobody too. Breezy here has over a thousand posts and most (if not all) of the advise given out by Breezy is supported by the heavy-weights here. In contrast, nobody agrees with you.

So, if perhaps I'm mistaken in all of the above and if you can, Please give me a legal definition of "Permanently Separated," as opposed to "Legally Separated."

Thanks,
Gryn
 
Last edited:

BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
While blame boy is looking through is textbooks here's the definitions for you:

California Family Code Section 771 - provides that a spouse's earnings and accumulations received while living separate and apart from the other spouse are characterized as separate property.

However, you may be surprised by the extent and nature of the evidence required to show a permanent separation.

The judicial search for a marital separation date is fact-driven. Courts resolving date-of-separation disputes consider a range of factors and behavior. A notable case in point is In re Marriage of Baragry,1 in which the California Second District Court of Appeal reviewed the trial court's determination that the parties separated on the date the husband moved out of the family home in August 1971. The wife had contended that the separation date was October 1975, the date the husband filed his petition for dissolution of marriage.

In this case the court sided with the husband however, The court of appeal reversed the finding of the early date of separation. The appellate court explained that simply living in separate residences was not enough to constitute a separation. Nor was the absence of a sexual relationship or the fact of the husband's cohabitation with his girlfriend a controlling factor. The court was troubled by the "captain's paradise" that the husband had created and held that such behavior should not be rewarded: "During the period that spouses preserve the appearance of marriage, they both reap its benefits, and their earnings remain community property.

In the nearly 20 years that have elapsed since Baragry, the appellate courts have been consistent in demanding clear proof of a permanent separation and in preventing people from taking advantage of their ambiguous living arrangements.

Because there was no 'clear proof' that the couple had been separated, either legally or permanently, the appeals court reversed.

A separation, in general, is defined as the termination of legal cohabitation. A separation usually takes place when the parties physically separate, such as one party moving out of the family residence, or out of the marital bedroom. Once this physical separation has occurred, the parties are deemed to be separated. However, if the parties choose to become “legally separated”, this can be accomplished by the filing of an action for Legal Separation.
 
Last edited:

gryndor

Member
Ohh, Crystal Clarity... Thanks Breeze :D

I suppose BS will prolly not answer. You like my abbreviation for him though?? :evilsmile:

I thought it would be pertinent info for the other poster... Arkera... so I sent it to him/her. Looks like IAAL wrapped that one up.

Funny, when he speaks, it almost sounds like the booming voice of wisdom over my screen. Do any of the regulars argue with him? :D

*smootch*
 
Last edited:
B

blameshifting

Guest
gryndor said:
.
WTF refers to:




When everyone says "no," but you say "yes," with half of an explanation, that is what I was talking about when I said you were going against the common consensus.

BTW, those "long time posters" have been giving sound advise for long enough that their words count for a little more. When the new kid on the block shows up and starts discrediting established people in the neighborhood, guess who believes who.

I mean look at me. I have only 76 posts. I am nobody. You have 150, you are nobody too. Breezy here has over a thousand posts and most (if not all) of the advise given out by Breezy is supported by the heavy-weights here. In contrast, nobody agrees with you.

So, if perhaps I'm mistaken in all of the above and if you can, Please give me a legal definition of "Permanently Separated," as opposed to "Legally Separated."

Thanks,
Gryn
"everyone"? You actually mean BelizeBreeze. I posted a very clear definition of "permanent separation" on that thread.

A legal separation involves a separation and a court ruling on the division of property, alimony and all those other fun things.

People make mistakes, including BelizeBreeze and JETX.
 

I AM ALWAYS LIABLE

Senior Member
gryndor said:
Ohh, Crystal Clarity... Thanks Breeze :D

I suppose BS will prolly not answer. You like my abbreviation for him though?? :evilsmile:

I thought it would be pertinent info for the other poster... Arkera... so I sent it to him/her. Looks like IAAL wrapped that one up.

Funny, when he speaks, it almost sounds like the booming voice of wisdom over my screen. Do any of the regulars argue with him? :D

*smootch*

My response:

BelizeBreeze conducted some extremely accurate research. My compliments to him concerning this important issue and the "separation" distinctions.

To go one step further, Baragry also says that spouses who discontinue their sexual relationship and even commence extramarital cohabitation are not "separated" for purposes of Ca Fam § 771(a) if they otherwise maintain the appearance of a married couple. [Marriage of Baragry (1977) 73 Cal.App.3d 444, 448, 140 Cal.Rptr. 779, 780-781]

"Funny, when he speaks, it almost sounds like the booming voice of wisdom over my screen. Do any of the regulars argue with him?"

MY RESPONSE: Geez, do have THAT kind of an affect? Rarely does anyone argue with me over a point of law. If they should happen to make that mistake, I slit their throat.

IAAL
 
Last edited:

gryndor

Member
I AM ALWAYS LIABLE said:
Rarely does anyone argue with me over a point of law. If they should happen to make that mistake, I slit their throat.

IAAL
Ouch, Point taken! :cool:

To BS:

blameshifting said:
I posted a very clear definition of "permanent separation" on that thread.
No hon, All you said was:


blameshifting said:
The marital community ends on the day that you cease living together with the intent not to reunite. Property acquired after that date will be presumed to be separate property.
Which is vague if nothing else, and then you said later:


blameshifting said:
California Presumptions – California is a community property state. All property acquired during the course of the marriage is presumed to be community property, except for property acquired by gift, devise, or bequest. All property acquired before marriage or after permanent separation is presumed to be separate property.
Which still doesn't clarify what permanent separation is. You did not post a very clear definition. But don't bother now... Breezy way perfectly clear.

Gryn
 
Last edited:
B

blameshifting

Guest
gryndor said:
You did not post a very clear definition. But don't bother now... Breezy way perfectly clear.

Gryn
'The marital community ends on the day that you cease living together with the intent not to reunite'

If that's vague, blame the law, which BelizeBreeze quoted:

"California Family Code Section 771 - provides that a spouse's earnings and accumulations received while living separate and apart from the other spouse are characterized as separate property. "

Like it or not, it just happens to be a vague sort of thing that leads to lots of court battles and court rulings that attempt to settle the sorts of issues that come up when you are trying to apply a law that says "living separate" to a real situation. That's one of the problems with a "permanent separation", you can't really be sure you have one.

It's nice to see BelizeBreeze now do the research he should have done in the other thread prior to jumping all over me.

Now if he'll just go do some research into 50 year old fences ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top