When we think of family, we of course think of our relatives and the people who live with us or who are as close to us as if they were blood relatives. We also think of our pets and our animals, who for some are as important, vital, and supportive as human family members.
Pets as Property in a Divorce
When families separate because of divorce, dividing up custody of animals can be as emotionally wrenching as dividing up custody of human children. Couples may be ready to argue which of them can provide for better care for the animal. They are often saddened to hear that pets are considered property, no different than the couch or the car or the family business.
Vindictive spouses can even ask that an animal be sold, and the profits divided, the same way that a spouse could ask for any piece of property to be liquidated.
California Law Changes How Pets are Treated
That is set to change in California, which recently passed a new law that allows family law judges to consider which spouse’s home is best for a pet. The law allows the court, upon a party’s request, to consider factors such as which person will provide the highest level of care for the animal, and which home is most likely to avoid cruelty to the animal. That means that a court will presumably take evidence as to who cares for the animal, pays the vet bills, or spends the most time with the pet.
Parties can even ask for temporary “custody” during the family law proceedings, so that the animal has a safe and supportive home while the divorce is going on.
This is a big step for animal lovers, although some divorce professionals do have concern that it gives parties to a divorce another thing to fight about.
The law does not provide a lot of details. For example, it is uncertain whether a spouse who wants but does not get ownership of the animal is entitled to visitation, although the language of the statute sure seems like that is the intention. That is a big benefit, given that courts had previously said that once an animal is given to one spouse, there is no legal authority for a judge to order that the other spouse be give visitation or time sharing.
The law is also permissive, saying that a judge “may” consider the animal’s well being. It is not written as being mandatory.
Laws Considering Pets are Rare
Only Illinois and Alaska have laws similar to the new California laws. That means that in New Jersey, a court has no ability to make these kinds of determinations for a pet.
However, a court does have to enforce whatever terms the parties should reach in a premarital agreement, or any divorce settlement agreement. Consideration of who will have the animals and when is often overlooked, but is an important and enforceable provision in these kinds of agreements.
Be prepared for your divorce and to make sure your rights are protected. Contact Agnes Rybar LLC for help and guidance so you know what to expect in your family law case.
Recent Comments