Pecos Law Group

Marital Agreements In Nevada

2025-02-20T03:29:44Z

Bruce I. Shapiro, Pecos Law Group

Prenuptial Agreements.

When getting married in Nevada without a prenuptial agreement, one is expressly consenting to be bound by the laws of Nevada upon a divorce. Prenuptial agreements may not be considered “romantic,” but ugly divorces are even less romantic. Approximately one-half of all marriages in the United States end in divorce. It is generally easier to address potential problems or issues before marriage rather than in the context of a divorce. If you and your spouse cannot agree on terms for a prenuptial agreement, what does that say about your prospective marriage? Moreover, prenuptial agreements do not just protect the wealthier party. A properly drafted prenuptial agreement may provide both parties protection under Nevada law. Further, considering the costs of a wedding a potential divorce, the cost of a prenuptial agreement may easily pay for itself. In sum, it is better to discuss and resolve the “tough issues” before marriage, rather than upon a possible divorce. Although no prenuptial agreement can possibly address every possible issue, issues that should be considered when drafting a prenuptial agreement include:

Whether existing property will be retained as separate property or become community property?
Whether the appreciation of property will be separate property or community property?
Whether earnings or other income will be considered community property after marriage?
Whether there will be alimony or other compensation paid by one spouse to the other in the event of a divorce?
Whether a business owned by one of the parties will remain separate or begin accruing a community property interest?
Will there be inheritance rights or other benefits upon the death of either party?
Do the terms of the agreement contemplate possible changes in the law, such as tax law?

Although it is legally possible to have an enforceable prenuptial agreement with only one person having independent legal counsel, it is not advisable, and most experienced attorneys will not participate in the negotiation or drafting of a prenuptial agreement where both parties do not have licensed, Nevada counsel. Further, what you, legally, may do in a prenuptial agreement and what you should do, legally and morally, are different. Additionally, although theoretically a prenuptial agreement may be valid if signed the day before the marriage, it is recommended to begin the process no more than 90 days before the marriage and having an agreement signed at least 30 days before the wedding. While no agreement can provide "iron-clad" protection, with the proper planning, the appropriate pre-agreement and post-marital conduct, the chances of a prenuptial agreement being enforceable and achieving one’s objectives may be significantly enhanced NRS 123A, and the Nevada Supreme Court cases of Fick v. Fick, Sogg v. Nevada State Bank and Kantor v. Kantor, contain virtually all Nevada law relating to the enforcement prenuptial agreements. All parties entering into a prenuptial agreement should be familiar with these authorities.

Marriage Planning Without a Prenuptial Agreement

Some of the same techniques that are used to protect one’s assets from a creditor may also be used to protect one’s separate property, even without a prenuptial agreement, in the event of a divorce. The use of entities and trusts not only provide estate planning benefits, but may also provide some financial protection in the absence of a prenuptial agreement. Further, the proper planning using separate bank accounts and avoiding the commingling of post marriage earnings with premarital funds may also afford some protection. While these alternatives may afford some protection, they cannot completely replace the protections provided by a prenuptial agreement. All parties should be aware of the legal significance of signing a quitclaim or other deed relating to real property. In Nevada, there is a legal presumption that a spouse signing a quitclaim deed to title property either in the name of the community or in the name of the other spouse is a gift of that spouse’s interest in the property. For example, if a spouse owns a home before marriage and chooses to place their spouse’s name on the home after marriage, it can create the presumption of a gift and eliminate the separate property interest that spouse may have had in the home. Alternatively, if a married couple owns a home jointly and one spouse signs a quitclaim deed placing title in the sole name of the other spouse, for example, as part of a refinance, it can create a presumption that the spouse not on the title gifted all of their community property interest in the home to the spouse on the title. The legal ramifications of signing these deeds is often not discussed during the home-buying or refinancing process, leaving many individuals caught by surprise when they file for divorce and discover they may have waived their interest in a home. Married individuals who are considering changing the title to a home they own should consult with an attorney before doing so to understand what legal effects it may have.

Cohabitation Agreements

Cohabitation agreements are relatively new and have seen increased popularity as more couples live together rather than get married. While there is no “common law marriage” in Nevada, specific financial risks may exist for couples living together who chose not to get married. Cohabitation agreements have not been judicially examined in Nevada and the expense of such an agreement is justified in only limited circumstances. Most people will be better served with a prenuptial agreement because a properly drafted prenuptial agreement provides more certainty in being enforced than a cohabitation agreement.

Marital Settlement Agreements

A marital settlement agreement, often referred to as an “MSA,” is a legally binding contract between two married persons that sets forth the terms and conditions of a divorce. A marital settlement agreement contemplates that the parties will separate and likely divorce in the near future, but it does not necessarily require them to immediately obtain a divorce. The marital settlement may address terms for the custody and support of children, the support of a spouse and the division of property and debts. The terms of the marital settlement agreement may allow the parties to attempt a reconciliation before immediately obtaining a divorce. Parties who are not absolutely sure they want to divorce may find it helpful to finalize the terms of a potential divorce, without immediately divorcing, in order to remove the uncertainties and pressures that a divorce proceeding present. After the parties sign a marital settlement agreement they may subsequently decide whether to void the agreement and reconcile, enter into a post nuptial agreement, or finalize the divorce. Although there is not a legally specific time as to the “shelf life” of a marital settlement, it will generally remain enforceable for a reasonable period of time. What is reasonable may be determined by the parties continued living together and whether they observed the terms of the marital settlement agreement after it was executed.

Post Nuptial Agreements

Postnuptial agreements are similar to prenuptial agreements but they are entered into after marriage. Unlike a Marital Settlement Agreement that is intended to resolve matters in contemplation of a divorce, a postnuptial agreement presumes the parties will remain married. Therefore, the scope of what a postnuptial agreement may accomplish is more limited than a typical prenuptial agreement and the enforcement is more scrutinized by the courts than prenuptial agreements. Spouses entering a postnuptial agreement have a fiduciary duty to one another that requires a higher degree of disclosure and fairness. It is also essential that both parties have independent counsel when entering into a post nuptial agreement. Postnuptial agreements remain relatively untested in Nevada, but may be useful in certain instances such as estate planning or resolving marital disputes.

Bruce Shapiro Named 2025 Family Lawyer Of The Year

2024-08-16T16:48:10Z

BY U.S. NEWS – BEST LAWYERS’ DIRECTORY

PECOS LAW GROUP RECEIVES ANOTHER TOP TIER LAS VEGAS FAMILY LAW RANKING IN THE 2025 “BEST LAW FIRMS”

Pecos Law Group attorney Bruce Shapiro was named the 2025 Family Lawyer of the Year by the prestigious U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ directory. Both Mr. Shapiro (for 15 consecutive years) and fellow Pecos Law Group attorney Paul Lemcke (for 20 consecutive years) have historically been included on the U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ listing. Mr. Shapiro has been named “Lawyer of the Year” in the practice of family law for the fourth time in the past nine years (2016, 2018, 2022, 2025). Mr. Lemcke has also been awarded the Best Lawyer four times (2015, 2019, 2020, 2024). Further, for the 11th consecutive year, Pecos Law Group was awarded a Tier 1 ranking in the 2025 Edition of U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ “Best Law Firms” for family law firms practicing in the Las Vegas, Nevada metropolitan area. The “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on a combination of client feedback, law firm survey data, and Best Lawyers’ exacting peer-review process. Client feedback addressed expertise, responsiveness, cost-effectiveness, civility, and whether they would refer another person to the firm. Lawyer peer-review centered on expertise, responsiveness, integrity, cost-effectiveness, whether they would refer a matter to a firm, and whether they consider a firm a worthy competitor. The member lawyers of Pecos Law Group are always tremendously proud and gratified by the firm’s inclusion on the prestigious U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ list.

IVF: What Is It, and Why Have I Been Hearing So Much About It?

2024-07-08T16:18:10Z

Most individuals have heard the news that Alabama passed a law that effectively “bans” what is known as IVF. But what is IVF, why does the law essentially ban it, and what does that mean for you in Nevada? IVF stands for “in vitro fertilization.” This is a medical treatment that is used predominantly for couples experiencing infertility. It involves collecting eggs from the ovaries of one person, and fertilizing them with the sperm of another. During this process, several eggs are fertilized at one time, creating embryos. One or more of the embryos are then implanted in the person’s uterus, while other embryos are typically stored by freezing. Depending upon the couple, IVF would either use their respective eggs and sperm, one partner’s eggs and a third party’s sperm, or a third party’s eggs and one partner’s sperm. Often, an individual who undergoes IVF may become pregnant with multiples, like twins or triplets, due to the number of embryos that are implanted. The first birth via IVF occurred not in a human, but in a rabbit. The first baby conceived via IVF in a human was born in 1978. Robert Edwards, who was the doctor who carried out the first successful human IVF birth, was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2010 for his contributions to medicine. It is estimated that more than eight million children worldwide have been born as a result of IVF. Part of the typical procedure for IVF involves fertilizing several embryos to try to ensure that a healthy embryo is implanted that will give the most chance of leading to a successful, viable pregnancy. After implantation, the remaining embryos are typically frozen for potential future use. Sometimes, however, when the embryos are thawed to prepare for implantation, there is a possibility they could be destroyed. Sometimes embryos are damaged and unable to be used as well, or if there is a genetic mutation in an embryo, sometimes it is discarded. IVF has been controversial. In the early 1970’s, some individuals criticized IVF as unethical, due to the separation of childbirth from traditional means as well as the possibility of birth defects. In the late 1970’s, an organization called the Ethics Advisory Board (“EAB”) was created to review proposals seeking federal funds to research IVF. In 1980, however, the EAB was disbanded, which caused significant delays in research in the United States. By the 1980’s the debate focused on whether it was morally acceptable to “create life” in a petri dish. A decade later, individuals argued about possible embryo manipulation due to advances in DNA testing. In the absence of an ethical board, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Fertility Society stepped in to develop ethical standards for research. In 1985, congress created the Biomedical Ethics Board, which looked into all human subjects involved in federally-funded biomedical research, which also encompassed IVF, The board, however, basically ceased to exist by 1989 due to a disagreement among its members on abortion. Research on IVF continued nonetheless and major advances have been made in the field since that time. Why are you hearing about IVF so much in the news recently? In 2020, an unauthorized person destroyed frozen embryos at an IVF clinic in Alabama, and the parties to whom the embryos belonged sued. In February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court issued a decision that the frozen embryos were “persons” under the law, and the case could move forward pursuant to a law enacted in 1872 that allows parents to sue civilly for the death of a child. The Court also cited a 2018 amendment to the Alabama state Constitution that mentions the “sanctity of unborn life.” As a result of this ruling, IVF clinics operating in Alabama paused operations, due to the legal ramifications of embryos being considered people. There are several legal issues that arose with the decision, including whether embryos need to be frozen and preserved forever, since they presumably could not be discarded, and whether genetic testing should even continue if all embryos must be preserved anyway. Legislators in Alabama, however, have been quick to try to pass laws to lessen the impact of this decision. Governor Kay Ivey recently signed a bill to protect IVF. While two clinics stated they would resume services, one expressed caution, as the legislation does not actually clarify whether embryos have the same rights as children; rather, it seeks to give immunity from civil and criminal prosecution to the doctors and clinics who provide IVF services. The decision out of Alabama came as somewhat of a shock, particularly to the medical community. But what does it mean for women in Nevada? Is IVF in danger of being restricted here too? In Nevada, even after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, abortion continues to be legal. In the 2023 session, the Nevada legislature passed a Senate Joint Resolution seeking to guarantee a right, under the Nevada Constitution, to several reproductive health measures, including IVF. The resolution has not yet become law. If the bill is passed, it will appear on the ballot in a future election. For now, however, there are no legal restrictions on IVF in Nevada and it is not anticipated that any will be enacted in the near future. Curious about what happens to frozen embryos in the case of a divorce? Little legislation has been passed to address this. There is not yet Nevada statutory or case law on the subject, but the general trend among states is that the parent who does not want the embryos implanted generally prevails – i.e., the Courts will generally not force them to become a biological parents if they do not wish to do so. To read more about the legal implications of the disposition of frozen embryos during a divorce, please read our prior blog on the subject here: https://pecoslawgroup.com/twenty-first-century-conundrum-happens-frozen-embryos-couple-separates/. If you are going through a divorce or considering filing for divorce and need information about the disposition of frozen embryos, an experienced family law attorney can help you to determine the best course of action.

Is a GPS Tracker On Your Spouse’s Vehicle Legal In Nevada?

2024-07-08T16:19:20Z

Beginning on July 1, 2023, it became illegal to place a GPS tracker on an individual’s vehicle without their knowledge. The change came about due to Assembly Bill (“AB”) 356, a bipartisan bill approved unanimously by the Nevada Legislature and signed into law by Governor Lombardo. The United States District Court for the District of Nevada previously held, in Ringelberg v. Vanguard Integrity Prof’ls-Nev., Inc., No. 2:17-CV-01788-JAD-PAL (D. Nev. 2018), that using a GPS tracking device constitutes a civil invasion of privacy and that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to their day-to-date movements in a vehicle. Ringelberg was a case involving an attorney and two companied he worked or provided services for, as Ringelberg sued the companies for various employment-related claims. Ringelberg was hired as general counsel, and claimed he was promised stock and bonuses by the company. Ringelberg then, however, witnessed sexually harassing conduct by one of the company’s owners and confronted him. Shortly thereafter, Ringelberg was informed his services had been terminated. Ringelberg and the company entered into a settlement agreement, but it remained contentious. He then discovered that the company had retained a private investigator to place a GPS tracker on his vehicle. Ringelberg sued for invasion of privacy, claiming the company surveilled Ringelberg, including a tracking device on his vehicle as well as using “long-range parabolic microphones” to listen in on his conversations. The private investigator was questioned and acknowledged he had placed a tracking device on Ringelberg’s vehicle at the direction of the company. In his lawsuit, Ringelberg asserted a cause of action for invasion of privacy. Though GPS trackers were not illegal at the time, Nevada law allows for such a civil action. In Nevada, the tort of “invasion of privacy” includes four different torts:

Unreasonable intrusion upon the seclusion of another;
Appropriation of the other’s name or likeness;
Unreasonable publicity given to the other’s private life; or
Publicity that unreasonably places the other in a false light before the public.

Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652A (1977). The Court found that Ringelberg could proceed on his invasion of privacy claim because, citing a United States Supreme Court decision, monitoring a person’s movements has Fourth Amendment implications, and that Ringelberg had a reasonable expectation of privacy as to his daily movements in his vehicle. The United States Supreme Court decision cited by the Court was U.S. v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012). In that case, the Court found that the Fourth Amendment dictates the Government installing a GPS tracking device on a vehicle constitutes a “search” within the meaning of the Amendment. Before July 2023, Nevada law did not prohibit a person from installing a tracking device on another person’s vehicle. Two Nevada assemblywomen, Republican Jill Dickman and Democrat Selena La Rue Hatch, co-sponsored the bill and told the Legislature that the bill would benefit, “individuals experiencing domestic violence and/or abuse, victims of harassment, victims of stalking, all Nevadans.” They cited statistics showing that one in six women and one in 19 men have been stalked within their lifetime. AB 356, which will be codified in Chapter 200 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, states that the crime of “unlawful installation of a mobile tracking device” is committed when a person “knowingly installs, conceals or otherwise places a mobile tracking device in or on the motor vehicle of another person without the knowledge and consent of an owner or lessor of the motor vehicle.” The statute does not apply to law enforcement agencies. The first offense of this statute is considered a misdemeanor, the second offense is a gross misdemeanor, and the third and any subsequent offenses are felonies. There are 11 different states that consider GPS and other location trackers stalking, including Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Washington, and Wyoming, as well as Washington, D.C., Another ten states prohibit the installation of a tracking device on a vehicle without the owner’s consent. These states include Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, and Nevada as of last year. Finally, in six other states – California, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Virginia – there are prohibitions on electronic tracking generally, not just on vehicles, but any time they are used to determine the location or movement of a person without their consent. Why have states become so concerned about GPS trackers? According to tech researchers from Cornell and New York University, spyware is often used for domestic violence. In a paper published in 2018 for the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, researchers noted that there are “several hundred” apps used in intimate partner surveillance and that there are dozens of overt spyware tools. They found that many of these apps appear to be legitimate, but can be used for – and, in some cases, are even advertised for – surveillance instead of legitimate purposes. Reportedly, after being informed of the study, Google promised to expand their restrictions on such apps. In terms of GPS trackers specifically, there have been many reports of victims of intimate partner violence feeling “terrorized” by such trackers. This has also led to the rise in “tracker detecting” apps, which purport to be able to scan for things like GPS trackers and Apple AirTags. GPS trackers have also been used to harass public officials. In fact, Reno Mayor Hillary Schieve revealed that, during the 2022 election season, she found a GPS tracking device on her vehicle. Mayor Schieve discovered that it was the same monitoring device that had been used months earlier to track then-Washoe County Commissioner Vaughn Hartung. Mayor Schieve brought a court case against the private detectives, who have refused to name their clients. At the time, this was not illegal. After the Court affirmed the Discovery Commissioner’s recommendations the private investigators to comply with subpoenas that would identify the individuals who hired them, the private investigators filed a petition for writ with the Nevada Supreme Court, which is still pending final decision. The passage of a statute making the use of GPS trackers on vehicles illegal is a major shift in Nevada law, particularly in the area of family law where the issue of GPS trackers is raised often. Individuals who suspect there may be a tracker located on their vehicle can generally contact law enforcement or a private investigator to check a vehicle for trackers. If you are dealing with a contentious divorce or custody matter and have been tracked with a GPS tracker, an experienced family law attorney can help advise you as to your next steps.

The Death of No – Fault Divorce?

2024-07-26T17:45:54Z

In 1969, then-Governor Ronald Reagan became the first to legalize “no-fault” divorce. California’s Family Law Act of 1969 started a trend of reform all over the country and now every State has a form of no-fault divorce. What is “no-fault divorce”? Before no-fault divorce laws, in order to obtain a divorce, one spouse had to be found “at fault,” and the other spouse “innocent.” Some “faults” were things like adultery, abuse, or abandonment. If the “at fault” spouse wanted to be granted a divorce, they would need to obtain the consent of the “innocent” spouse. If a spouse could not prove fault, or if a spouse simply wanted a divorce due to personal differences and not because any wrongdoing occurred, they could not divorce. When the Family Law Act of 1969 was signed, the reasoning behind making the change was due to issues with spouses having to prove the “fault” of the other while remaining blameless – otherwise any fault would cancel out the claim – leading to perjury. There were issues with hiring private investigators to follow parties around, and some even staged fake adulterous liaisons just to be able to get a divorce, even if they were found to be the “at fault” party. Finally, lawmakers reasoned that allowing parties, specifically women, to divorce without making such lurid accusations would reduce instances of domestic abuse. Lawmakers were correct about abuse. Researchers who tracked the passage of no-fault divorce laws among the states noticed a dramatic drop in rates of female suicide, domestic violence, and spousal homicide of women. One research opined this was “not just because abused women (and men) could more easily divorce their abusers, but also because potential abusers knew that they were more likely to be left.” There is no argument that with the proliferation of no-fault divorce laws came an increase in the divorce rate. There is, however, much misconception about what that divorce rate was. The oft-quoted “50% of all marriages end in divorce” is inaccurate. That idea came from when the U.S. Census Bureau noted one year that there had been 2.4 million marriages and 1.2 million divorces. This statistic, however, was only counting the number of marriages that occurred year, ignoring all of the marriages already in existence. Nevertheless, the national divorce rate peaked in 1980, when there were 22.6 divorces for every 1,000 married women. This was likely due to the fact that more women were entering the workforce, meaning less women were stuck in marriages they did not want for economic factors. Before the 1970s, women were not able to apply for their own credit cards, had no workplace protection for pregnancy, sexual harassment, or discrimination, had no housing protection against discrimination, or, in some cases, have any control over money or property if they were married. Despite the legal and practical reasoning behind no-fault divorce laws, there is an increasingly-vocal push to abolish them. Podcaster Steven Crowder stated that his own divorce was “not my choice” and said, with some derision, “my then-wife decided that she didn’t want to be married anymore.” Crowder has also made statements about needing “to reform divorce laws in this country” because women with “no skill set” are marrying men just to divorce him and “take half.” Another commentator, Matt Walsh, has stated that he has been “publicly opposed to no fault divorce for as long as I’ve had a platform.” U.S. Senator JD Vance has stated that no-fault divorce laws make it “easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear” and experienced skepticism about “violent” or “unhappy” marriages. Mike Johnson, who is currently the Speaker of the House, has also been vocal about his opposition to no-fault divorce, blaming it for “turning the United States into a completely amoral society.” In 2022, the Texas GOP called for the legislature to “rescind unilateral no-fault divorce laws, to support covenant marriage, and to pass legislation extending the period of time in which a divorce may occur to six months after the date of filing for divorce.” A “covenant marriage” is a religiously-influenced distinct type of marriage in which spouses agree to obtain counseling and to limited grounds to seek a divorce. Covenant marriages are legal – though voluntary – in Arizona, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Republican groups in Louisiana and Nebraska have called for similar reform to no-fault divorce laws. Critics of no-fault divorce laws often cite divorce rates and harm to children as reasons why individuals should need to prove specific grounds for a divorce. A 2019 study, however, by World Psychology found that while children may struggle with the transition of divorce, most children of divorced parents “exhibit no obvious psychological problem.” Additionally, as noted above, divorce rates have been a topic rife with misinformation. In fact, children of high-conflict marriages typically benefit from divorce. Further, the U.S. divorce rate actually hit a 50-year low in 2019 per Census data from 2020. Doing away with no-fault divorce laws would likely have multiple impacts. As noted, instances of suicide and spousal homicide could again increase. No-fault divorce is, in the words of Joanna L. Grossman and Natalie Nanasi for Justia, “an escape hatch for abused spouses.” In fact, despite Crowder denying that his marriage involved abuse, a Ring camera video leaked after he complained about his divorce showed Crowder berating and threatening his ex-wife, who was eight months pregnant. Survivors of domestic violence often do not seek divorce based upon “cruelty” grounds, as making those accusations publicly can be exceptionally dangerous. Further, having to “prove” abuse in a courtroom can cause survivors to be traumatized and re-victimized. There are also due process considerations. Doing away with no-fault divorce essentially means forcing an individual to remain in a marriage they may not want. It could make the divorce process significantly more costly and delayed. Most divorces are settled out of court, and many are settled without any court intervention at all. If a spouse has to prove “fault,” it is an entirely new layer of litigation that must be added to whatever issues in that marriage must be litigated already. For now, no-fault divorce is legal in all 50 states, and the only “grounds” one needs is “irreconcilable differences.” If you are considering filing a divorce, or your spouse has filed a divorce, an experienced family law attorney can assist you in determining your options and the best strategy for your case.

Pecos Law Group December 2023 Blog

2024-07-08T16:21:34Z

Four Reasons Why Las Vegas is the Divorce Capital of the World Las Vegas has certainly earned its reputation as the divorce capital of the world. Some of the reasons are more obvious than others:

Short residency requirements. While some states have residency requirements of up to six months, only six-week residence is required in Nevada and there is no waiting period. In general, divorces may be obtained much faster in Nevada than most states. This is the primary reason how Nevada earned its reputation. Moreover, whether contested or uncontested, one may generally obtain a divorce faster in Nevada than other states.

The ease of getting married. It’s not necessarily too easy to get divorced in Las Vegas, it’s too easy to get married. You obtain a marriage license and then get married virtually next door within an hour. The easier and faster it is to get married without giving it much thought certainly creates more divorces.

Lifestyle and Vices. While gambling, alcohol, drugs and strip clubs are available in many cities, few are each as readily accessible as in Las Vegas. Las Vegas is a 24-hour town with many people working many different types of shifts with establishments to satisfy vices always available.

No Fault Divorce. Unlike some states, Nevada has no fault divorce. In other words, if one party wants a divorce, they are entitled to a divorce and do not have to show fault or establish any other basis for wanting the divorce.

Five Indications That Your Spouse May Be Preparing For Divorce Although it happens in rare cases, a divorce rarely comes without warning. It’s important to look for the warning signs so that you are not prepared in the event your spouse is considering a divorce. Here are five things to be aware:

If you have been out of the workforce and your spouse suddenly suggests that you need to get a job. This is a sure sign that your spouse has consulted with a lawyer and learned about Nevada alimony law. Your spouse was likely advised to hold off filing the divorce as long as possible until you become employed in order to mitigate his or her alimony exposure.

Your spouse suddenly becomes parent of the year. If your spouse had little time or interest in parenting before and is now interested in meeting the children’s teachers, going to school activities and doctors’ appointments, this is a good sign that your spouse has consulted with a lawyer and is attempting to make a case for joint custody of the children. In many cases, the motivation for joint custody is to decrease a child support obligation.

Joint credit cards are cancelled. If your spouse starts closing joint credit card accounts, it could be a sign that your spouse is trying to limit your spending and decrease your potential need for alimony.

Significant cash withdrawals. If you start noticing unusual activity at the ATM, this could be a sign that your spouse is attempting to “siphon” off money to obtain a divorce lawyer, or is attempting to put aside cash that he or she may not account for during the divorce. Retirement liquidation. If your spouse liquidates a retirement account without consulting or notifying you, this is a clear red flag. Not only does a withdrawal from a retirement account create tax liability, but it may be the only asset you will obtain upon a divorce and you must preserve this asset.

Personality changes. If your spouse is suddenly going to the gym (without you), is losing weight, purchasing new stylish clothes, or staying out late at night, this could be the sign that your spouse is having an affair and may be preparing for a divorce. You know your spouse better than anyway and if you have a gut feeling that something is going on, the chances are, something is going on.

If you feel that your spouse is considering divorce and may be filing for divorce, the best thing you can do is to have a consultation with a family law attorney who can explain your rights and help take preventive actions to protect yourself in the event of a divorce. Mandatory Mediation in Clark County, Nevada Mediation is a process by which a professionally trained person helps to guide parents to reach an agreement regarding the physical custody of their children. Mediation seeks an agreement that focuses on each parent’s rights and responsibilities regarding the children, and more important, on the children’s needs. It is important to approach mediation with an open mind and focus on the best future needs of your children. Under the Clark County Family Court Rules, mediation is mandatory in virtually every case. The mediation process is private and all communications are confidential and may not be disclosed to the court, absent issues of domestic violence or child abuse. The mediator cannot be called as a witness and the mediator does not have any authority to make any decisions. Mediation should be utilized to make an arrangement that you believe is in your children’s best interest. An agreement, versus a contested custody battle, will save you time, money and most important, will serve the best interests of your client. Four Ways How To Spend Less Money On Your Las Vegas Divorce To hire a Las Vegas divorce lawyer is a major financial commitment. A Las Vegas family law can cost you anywhere from $250.00 an hour to $750.00 an hour. Although more money does not necessarily mean you will have the best divorce lawyer, to a large extent, you get what you pay for. While not every divorce action necessitates extensive discovery, expert witnesses and depositions, minimal investigation is required in virtually every action. Some costs, like filing fees, are fixed no matter which lawyer you use. Additionally, some fees may be out of your attorney’s control. Each judge has his or her own set of rules which may also increase the cost of your litigation. One of the biggest complaints levied at attorneys is that we do not return telephone calls. While it is our practice to return telephone calls the same day, or at latest, within 24 hours of receiving any message, it must be understood that if we were to take every call from every client every day, we would never have time to do the work you hired us for. In order to minimize your frustration, let me offer some suggestions:

Consolidate your calls. Rather than call your attorney every time you have a question, write down your questions and unless it is an emergency, consolidate your questions into one call, rather than three or four. Most lawyers will charge you a minimum fee for any telephone conversation so you can save money by calling few times. Most attorneys do not mind taking your telephone calls whenever you have a question, but you may not like it much when you get your bill at the end of the month.

Whenever possible, speak with staff. They can generally answer most nonlegal questions and you are billed less for their time than you are for a lawyer.

Use email. Rather than call your attorney and not having completely thought out your question, write your question out and email it. Many lawyers charge less for an emails than telephone conversations. More important, if your lawyer doesn’t know the answer off the top of his head and have to charge you for a second call, he or she can research and email you with an appropriate answer. More important, you don’t have to try to remember what your lawyer told you or misunderstand what you were told, you have a written record.

Organize your documents, thoughts and promptly provide your attorney with any information or answers he or she requests. Every time an attorney has to follow up or request information a second time, it costs you money.

Home Sweet Home: What Happens To Your House After A Divorce?

2024-07-08T16:23:11Z

In 2019, Jeff Bezos and MacKenzie Scott (formerly MacKenzie Bezos) ended their marriage after 25 years in what was the most expensive divorce in history and in what made Scott one of the world’s wealthiest women. Though most of the details of the divorce were kept private, it was reported that Scott received the parties’ Beverly Hills home, believed to be worth more than $37 million at the time. Scott, however, decided to donate the home to a nonprofit organization. Bezos reportedly kept the parties’ Washington DC mansion, as well as several other properties. When Kim Kardashian and Kanye West split up in 2021, Kim kept their mansion in Hidden Hills, California and allegedly bought out West for his interest in the home for $23 million. The parties also had other properties in Malibu, Idaho, Palm Springs, Calabasas, Wyoming, and Belgium. In both celebrity and non-celebrity divorces, real property is often the most valuable asset to be divided. Unlike celebrities, however, most couples only need to worry about dividing one home. What happens to a home during a divorce? First, it is important to understand the distinction between a home’s title (ownership) and the mortgage obligation. The ownership interests in a home are determined by a deed that typically is filed with the county’s assessor and/or recorder. There are several different “types” of ownership, and these can vary state-by-state. Nevada recognizes four types of ownership:

Sole ownership: One individual or entity owns the property completely per title – though, as Nevada is a community property state, there can be a community property interest in a home even if both spouses’ names are never on it.
Community property ownership: A married couple owns the property as community property.
Joint tenancy: Two or more individuals own the property, with all owners having equal ownership.
Tenancy in common: Two or more individuals, who cannot be spouses, own the property but each owner may have a different ownership percentage.

The ownership is generally established when a home is purchased on the deed. Notably, this is different from a mortgage obligation. For example, a husband could be the only name, and the only one legally obligated to pay, a mortgage, while a deed may state the ownership of the home is as community property. One does not typically need to be on a real property deed in order to be obligated to pay the mortgage, and vice versa. If one party is awarded property in the divorce, therefore, transferring title is fairly simple and generally just requires that both parties sign a quitclaim deed. If there is a mortgage on the property, however, things get more complicated. Married couples usually acquire mortgages in both names. In fact, in closing on homes, mortgage brokers usually assume that both parties’ names will be on both the mortgage and the property. In fact, if one spouse wants a property in their sole name, the other spouse legally must sign a quitclaim deed relinquishing their community property interest in the property in order to make that happen. When a couple acquires a mortgage in both names, one or both names will need to be released from the mortgage obligation post-divorce. There are several options for this. First, the parties can simply sell the home and split the net proceeds. This is the simplest solution, and it also makes sense in many divorces because the proceeds constitute a large amount of cash that can be offset in exchange for other property that is awarded to either spouse in the divorce. The second option is to keep both names on the mortgage, either because one spouse agrees to do so or because the parties plan to keep the home as an investment property post-divorce. This option is riskier. If, for example, one party keeps a home in the divorce and agrees to pay the mortgage payments but the other party agrees to keep their name on the mortgage, if the first party simply stops paying the mortgage, the second party would still have that debt obligation, whether their name is on the title or not. Similarly, if two parties agree to each pay one-half of the mortgage to keep a home as an investment property and one party stops paying their half, the other party is still responsible for the entire mortgage, even if the parties have an agreement to split it. This can have detrimental effects on a person’s credit. The third option is for the party who wishes to keep the home to refinance to take the other party’s name off of the mortgage. If the party keeping the home has income sufficient to qualify for the mortgage, this is typically not an issue. It is, however, more complicated for an ex-spouse who is not employed. Alimony, however, can sometimes be used as income when applying to refinance. This option, however, may require that the party keeping the home buy the other party out of their interest in it. If there is not enough equity to take out or enough other assets to offset the interest, this may not be a viable option. Additionally, a party should remember if equity is taken out during a refinance, and if a higher interest rate is applied during a refinance, the monthly mortgage payment will be higher – sometimes significantly higher – after the refinance. A party should ensure they have adequate income to cover the mortgage before removing a portion of the equity from the property. Divorcing parties should be cautious about approaching the disposition of real property in a divorce. There are several methods to divide a home, each with their own pros and cons. If you are dealing with a divorce, or contemplating divorce, and there is real property involved, an experienced family law attorney can help you determine your best options as to what your interest in the property is and how to divide it in a divorce.

Postnuptial Agreements: Who is Getting Them, Why Would You Want One, and Are They Valid in Nevada?

2024-07-08T16:24:18Z

According to the data from the National Survey of Family Growth from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, up to 33% of first marriages end in either separation or divorce by the end of the first ten years. While very few anticipate a divorce or separation when they initially get married, issues can arise during the course of the marriage that may increase the likelihood of an eventual separation. One such factor is timing. Studies show that the risk of divorce is highest within the first two years of marriage, and between five and eight years of marriage. Simply put, the “seven-year itch” stereotype may be somewhat true. Marriages that make it past ten years experience a lower divorce risk for each subsequent year of marriage; though that trend may be changing, as the divorce rate among those in their 50’s and 60’s is rapidly increasing. While divorce rates are actually decreasing – hitting a record low in 2019 – more individuals are choosing to have prenuptial agreements when they get married. According to a poll conducted by Harris Poll, only around three percent of the 2,000 adults surveyed reported having a prenuptial agreement in 2010. In 2022, however, that number had jumped to 15 percent. Additionally, nearly 40 percent of those who had signed a prenuptial agreement were between the ages of 18 and 34, while under five percent of those aged 55 and above had signed one. This may be due to a number of factors. First, individuals between the ages of 18 and 34 likely grew up hearing the “50 percent of marriages end in divorce” trope that was prevalent in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. Individuals between 18 and 34 are also likely going into marriages with more debt than previous generations, due to student loan debt and medical debt. Individuals in that age group may be more concerned about becoming responsible for a spouse’s premarital debt. Additionally, women between the ages of 18 and 34 are also likely going into marriages with more income and assets than women in previous generations, creating more separate property at the outset of the marriage. Despite these factors, married couples who sign prenuptial agreements are still very much in the minority. What do you do if it looks like your marriage is headed towards a separation and you do not have a plan for a divorce? What do you do if you realize after you get married that you should have signed a prenuptial agreement? Enter the postnuptial agreement. The postnuptial agreement is more of a modern creation. While there is a “model uniform act” to which Nevada subscribes for prenuptial agreements – see Nevada Revised Statutes, chapter 123A – there is no similar statutory guidelines for postnuptial agreements. So are they enforceable? The short answer is yes, as long as they are not found to be unconscionable, they may be. Spouses have the right to make agreements with each other concerning assets and debts. There are, however, some unique aspects of postnuptial agreements to consider. First, under Nevada case law, spouses have a fiduciary duty to each other. This is important, because if a spouse is either mislead about the terms of a postnuptial agreement, the terms of a postnuptial agreement are completely one-sided, or one spouse has a lot more legal or business acumen than the other and prepares a postnuptial agreement favoring themselves, these can all be found to be unenforceable. One major difference between a prenuptial agreement and a postnuptial agreement is regarding alimony or spousal support. In a prenuptial agreement, the parties may choose to waive alimony or spousal support altogether. This could mean that a party to the prenuptial agreement is agreeing to never receive alimony from the other party, regardless of income, and it will generally be enforced unless the other spouse is forced to go on government assistance. A postnuptial agreement cannot, however, waive a right to alimony or spousal support. Including such a provision in a postnuptial agreement can render the entire agreement unenforceable. Any waiver of future alimony must be made before marriage. Simply put, it is possible to have a postnuptial agreement prepared after marriage, but the parameters of what it may cover are more limited and construed than a prenuptial agreement. What situations may be appropriate for a postnuptial agreement? First, a couple may need to update the terms of a prenuptial agreement based on more recent events. Sometimes this can mean modifying terms regarding income or support if one spouse unexpectedly begins to earn more than anticipated, or, as a marriage increases in length, some spouses may want to make the terms of a prenuptial agreement more generous to their spouse. In other circumstances, spouses may want to make agreements as to how their property might be divided in the event of a divorce. Some couples come into a marriage with little to no assets, and as those assets grow, spouses may need a postnuptial agreement if they agree to divide certain assets differently than 50/50, which is the general guideline for community property in Nevada. Some individuals choose to have postnuptial agreements prepared if they have children from a previous marriage for estate-planning and inheritance purposes. Additionally, although inherited assets are considered separate property in Nevada, they can potentially be transmuted into community assets if an individual is not careful, and sometimes in order to receive an inheritance, an individual needs a postnuptial agreement ensuring it would not be divided in a divorce. Finally, if one spouse has been financially irresponsible or incurred a large amount of debt in a marriage – for example, someone with an addiction to gambling – the other spouse may want a postnuptial agreement to avoid being responsible for that debt in the event of a divorce. Whatever your reason, if you find yourself in a position where you believe you may need a postnuptial agreement, an experienced family law attorney can help you determine whether a postnuptial agreement is right for you.

Brackeen v. Haaland and the ICWA: An Overview

2024-07-08T16:25:38Z

You may have heard that the Supreme Court of the United States will be taking up Brackeen v. Haaland, with several amicus briefs having been filed and oral arguments likely commencing in November 2022. But what is Brackeen about? What is the Indian Child Welfare Act and why could this decision be so monumental to American adoption law? First, a bit of history. A law called The Civilization Fund Act was passed by Congress in 1819, which attempted to enforce the so-called “civilization process” of Native Americans. In the late 19th century, the United States government began establishing institutions called “American Indian Boarding Schools” or “American Indian Residential Schools.” Between 1860 and 1978, approximately 357 of these schools operated across 30 different states. The first boarding school was established by the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1860 on the Yakima Reservation in Washington. These schools were not, however limited to Native American reservations, and the first off-reservation boarding school was opened in Carlisle, Pennsylvania in 1879. That school was founded by Richard Henry Platt, who based his education “program” off of experiments done on Native American assimilation projects conducted on imprisoned and captive Indigenous peoples. The United States Government forcibly, and often without consent, removed Native American children from their parents, homes, and tribes and placed them in these mandatory schools. The children were given Anglo-American names, not allowed to wear their traditional clothing, not allowed to speak their native language, and not allowed to practice their native religion. The children’s hair would also be forcibly cut, despite – or perhaps because – hair is sacred to many Indigenous peoples. The schools sought to forcibly assimilate Native American children into European-American culture. The conditions at these boarding schools could be horrific. Physical and sexual abuse was rampant, and children were often punished through beatings and heavy labor. They were also forced to watch disturbing films showing Native Americans being killed. Food and medical attention were often withheld, letting diseases like tuberculosis and measles run rampant. Children would then be buried in school cemeteries, and often parents were not even informed of their death until after the burial. Those who did survive carried significant trauma for the rest of their lives, and the effects of these schools can still be observed today; for example, there are Native languages that are both extinct and close to extinction due to generations of children not being allowed to speak to them. In the 20th century, the popularity of the boarding schools began to decrease, but Native American parents did not gain full legal right to deny their child’s placement at an off-reservation school until 1978 – with the passing of the Indian Child Welfare Act, or ICWA. ICWA established federal standards for the removal and placement of Native children, with the goal of trying to keep children connected with their families and Tribes. It ensures that Native American Tribes have sovereignty and jurisdiction over their members who reside on Tribal land. One facet of the ICWA concerns adoption of Native American children. It sets guidelines and specific requirements that must be met when a Native American child is removed from their parent’s home and placed into foster care or up for adoption. Simply put, ICWA prioritizes placement of Native American children, for both foster and adoptive families, with other members of their Tribe. That is where Brackeen v. Haaland comes in. Chad and Jennifer Brackeen received a foster placement of a 10-month-old Native American child in June 2016. Both of the child’s parents had their parental rights terminated a year later. Under ICWA, the Navajo Nation then stepped in, seeking to place the child with a Navajo family. The Navajo Nation initially lost the Court battle, and the Brackeens were able to adopt the child. The Brackeens then sought to adopt the child’s sister, but the child’s extended family stepped in. A federal lawsuit was filed in state court by the Brackeens, along with several other couples and three states, seeking to overturn the ICWA, and, in 2018, a federal district court in Texas held that the ICWA violates the United States Constitution – the first time any federal court has made such a finding. Appeals were brought by the United States federal government and four Native Tribes to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit Court reversed the underlying decision based upon the legal precedent United States v. Antelope, which held that “federal legislation with respect to Indian tribes … is not based upon impermissible racial classifications.” At the request of one of the judges, however, the decision was heard en banc, meaning that all the judges on the court hear and decide a case, rather than the initial three-judge panel. In its en banc opinion, the Fifth Circuit ruled that while parts of the ICWA were constitutional, the provisions regarding adoptive placement and preference of Native children with Native families violated the Equal Protection clause of the United States Constitution. The Fifth Circuit’s decision was 325 pages long. After this decision, the United States Federal Government, the State of Texas, the Cherokee Nation and the Brackeens all filed petitions for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. As of August 23, 2022, a total of 21 amicus briefs have been filed in support of upholding the ICWA, by both Native and non-Native organizations. It is unknown how the Supreme Court of the United States will rule on this issue. Challengers to the ICWA contend that the law racially discriminates against prospective non-Native parents and that its provisions regarding preferred placement with Native parents is unconstitutional. Proponents of the ICWA argue that this case has enormous implications not only to Native children and the preservation of Tribes and culture, but also to Tribal sovereignty as a whole. They also argue that placing children with extended families or within their communities is already best practice for the placement of children of any ethnicity. Depending on what is ultimately decided, the matter will have far-reaching implications for adoptions around the United States.

BRUCE SHAPIRO NAMED 2022 FAMILY LAWYER OF THE YEAR BY U.S. NEWS – BEST LAWYERS’ DIRECTORY; PECOS LAW GROUP RECEIVES A TOP TIER LAS VEGAS RANKING IN THE 2022 “BEST LAW FIRMS”

2024-07-08T16:26:32Z

Pecos Law Group lawyer Bruce Shapiro was named the 2022 Family Lawyer of the Year by the prestigious U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ directory. Both Mr. Shapiro (for 12 consecutive years) and fellow PLG lawyer Paul Lemcke (for 17 consecutive years) have historically been included on the U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ listing. Mr. Shapiro has been named “Lawyer of the Year” in the practice of family law for the third time in the past seven years. Further, for the ninth consecutive year, Pecos Law Group was awarded a Tier 1 ranking in the 2022 Edition of U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ “Best Law Firms” for family law firms practicing in the Las Vegas, Nevada metropolitan area. The “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on a combination of client feedback, law firm survey data, and Best Lawyers’ exacting peer-review process. Client feedback addressed expertise, responsiveness, cost-effectiveness, civility, and whether they would refer another person to the firm. Lawyer peer-review centered on expertise, responsiveness, integrity, cost-effectiveness, whether they would refer a matter to a firm, and whether they consider a firm a worthy competitor. The member lawyers of Pecos Law Group are always tremendously proud and gratified by the firm’s inclusion on the prestigious U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ list.