Blog

Unfortunately, even though much of our day-to-day activities are put on hold during a public health crisis, child custody and visitation disputes continue. In fact, they may even be worse. With schools closed and government authorities mandating people to stay at home, many parents are worried about their children. Heightened anxiety can exacerbate tensions between divorced and separated parents who may not get along well even under normal circumstances. We can help. It is important to remember that routines are important for children, even more so when other aspects of their lives are disrupted. There is nothing we can do right now about the closure of schools and the cancellation of play dates and birthday parties. But to maintain as much normalcy as possible, unless you or your children have been quarantined or are displaying symptoms of COVID-19, children should continue to see both parents according to existing parental access schedules. If you are being denied access to your children, or if your children cannot safely visit with you or their other parent because of potential exposure to novel coronavirus, we can work to negotiate a temporary solution that works for everyone during these unprecedented times. This may include an alternate “essential business” location to exchange the children such as a gas station, a “socially distant” outdoor visit, or periodic scheduled Facetime or Skype sessions. If we are unable to resolve your dispute, the Courts are open on a limited basis to hear emergency applications. We do not know how long the coronavirus will affect our daily lives, and no parent should be deprived of their rights for the duration of the crisis. At Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, we offer telephone and video consultations and conferences. We are fully equipped to work remotely from any location. If you need help with a divorce or family law issue, call us at 631-337-1977, email us, or contact us for a consultation.

Effective March 1, 2020, the income cap for child support calculations is $154,000 (previously $148,000), and the cap for maintenance calculations is $192,000 (previously $184,000). In New York, the amount of child support to be paid by the non-custodial parent is determined using a formula set forth in the statute known as the Child Support Standards Act [DRL §240, FCA §413].  The formula multiplies the parties' parental income by a certain percentage depending on the number of children, up to a certain level of income (the "cap").  Where the parental income of both parties combined exceeds the amount of the cap set forth in the law, the amount of child support payable on the excess income is left to the discretion of the Court, which may either apply the percentage or consider numerous other factors to determine the additional amount to be paid, such as the financial resources of the parties and child, the physical and emotional health of the child and special needs or aptitudes, the non-monetary contributions that the parents will make towards the care and well-being of the child, and other factors.  For cases with combined parental income below the income cap, an approximation of child support that would be ordered can be figured using the Child Support Standards Chart. For maintenance or spousal support, the Court similarly determines the amount to be paid using a formula set forth in the statute [DRL §236B, FCA §412], however the income cap referenced in the maintenance law applies only to the payor spouse (the spouse with higher income), rather than the parties' combined income.  Where the payor spouse's income exceeds the cap, the amount of additional support payable on the excess income, if any, is within the discretion of the judge, who must consider numerous factors such as the age and health of the parties, their present and future earning capacity, the wasteful dissipation of marital property, tax consequences, the standard of living established during the marriage, and others factors. The income caps for both maintenance and child support calculations are increased every two years in relation to the Consumer Price Index.

Believe it or not, a divorce (whether you’re the spouse seeking one or not) requires as much planning as a wedding, if not more. However, feelings of sadness, anger, anxiety and grief that often accompany divorce can make even the simplest of tasks feel impossible. This is especially true in the beginning stages of a divorce, when emotions are oftentimes at their peak. Consulting with an attorney is an important first step in the divorce process. Meeting with your prospective attorney not only allows you to evaluate whether you feel comfortable with him or her, but will also allow him or her to give you a “big picture” initial assessment on what the process may look like for you. Provided with the right information, an experienced divorce lawyer will be able to provide you with advice on the best ways to proceed, what you should expect, and what you are entitled to. It is very important that you convey complete and accurate information to the attorney in order to obtain the best advice. Preparing for a consultation in advance of your appointment will help organize your thoughts, clarify your objectives, and will equip your consulting attorney with the information necessary to give you the most accurate advice. Here are five things that you can and should bring with you to ensure you get the most out of your divorce consultation: 1. Tax returns, W-2’s, 1099’s, and recent paystubs Capturing as much information regarding your income and your spouse’s income is an important first step in the divorce process. If you bring tax returns and any other information regarding you and/or your spouse’s income, your prospective attorney may be able to calculate what support, if any, may be paid to you during and after the divorce, or what support you may be expected to pay. 2. Prior Agreements or Orders If you have a pre-nuptial agreement, a post-nuptial or separation agreement, or were previously divorced and have a post-judgment matter that you are seeking assistance with, make sure to bring the agreement or order with you so the attorney can better evaluate the impact, if any, that same will have on your case. Similarly, if you are in the midst of an ongoing divorce and are seeking to retain new counsel, make sure to bring a copy of all prior orders with you, along with any other documentation that has been served, exchanged or filed thus far, that is in your possession. 3. Narrative of Important Events It is important to list, in chronological order, any and all incidents of domestic violence between you and your spouse, and whether or not the incidents involved your children, if any. Your list may also include incidents that may have concerned you, or that you feel are important for the attorney to know, regardless of whether they are violent in nature. Coming prepared with a list is important, because it may be difficult for you to re-hash these incidents with the requisite specificity while you’re at the consultation. A list may also be important in determining whether any immediate action should be taken. 4. List of questions You are going to cover a lot of ground at a consultation, so it may be easy for you to lose sight of what burning questions you may have at the outset. Coming with a list of questions that you want answers to ensures that you leave with all of the information you wanted. 5. Wish List Having a list of what is most important to you can be extremely helpful in assisting the attorney in creating a roadmap of the divorce that is tailored to your specific desires. For example, keeping the marital home may be the most important thing to you. If your attorney knows that from the outset, he or she may be able to propose a plan that will include keeping your home as opposed to listing it for sale, which is oftentimes the default at the conclusion of a trial. Whether you are looking to commence a divorce case or have just been served with divorce papers, the process can quickly become overwhelming without the right guidance. Since every family is different, the roadmap to your divorce will be unique to you and your situation. That is why it is important to ensure that your consulting attorney has as much information as possible with which to guide you in the right direction. The attorneys of Petroske Riezenman & Meyers offer a free consultation to their clients to ensure that they are educated on their options and what they can expect moving forward.

On January 15, 2020, New York became the 10th state to grant adopted adults unrestricted access to their original pre-adoption birth certificates. This represents a significant shift from past practice, which heavily protected the birth parents’ desire for privacy, and only made such information accessible to the adopted individual if a court determined it was appropriate, which was not often the case. With this new development, adopted individuals wishing to locate their biological parents and other family members, should have an easier time of it. Whether that contact is welcomed by their biological relatives, is another matter.  

Often, when people envision the divorce process, they see a hotly contested legal battle with two expensive lawyers in a big courtroom and an intimidating judge that wields the power to control their finances, their lives, and even the lives of their children.  The truth is, most cases, even those that involve litigation, do not need to be the knock-down, drag-out brawls that people fear. One way to resolve your divorce outside of Court is through a process called Divorce Mediation, where a couple makes the conscious choice to try and work out their issues with an unbiased, trained third party, thereby conserving their time, money, energy and control. Divorce Mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution (commonly referred to as AADR) wherein both parties meet together with a single trained professional for a number of mediation sessions, and the mediator guides the parties towards an agreement on all the issues of their divorce, from the marital residence and credit card debt, to child support and custody. The mediation process is often a less expensive and potentially less stressful alternative to litigation that allows people to maintain control and actively participate in creating the final terms of their divorce settlement.  While mediation may not be for everyone, it could be an effective way for you and your spouse to part ways. There are many reasons couples choose mediation, instead of or before resorting to litigation. The top five reasons couples choose Divorce Mediation over litigation are: Many people save money using Divorce Mediation Couples who successfully mediate their divorces do not incur unpredictable litigation costs. When a case goes to Court, attorney fees are billed by the hour for court appearances and motion practice that often accompanies litigation, and can quickly add up.  It can be difficult to estimate the time that will be required to litigate, which is affected by numerous factors out of your (or your attorney=s) control, such as limitations on the judge=s time (many cases are placed on the Court=s calendar for the same day), or an unreasonable or unresponsive opposing counsel. Couples who mediate, however, are only responsible to pay the cost of one trained mediator, and face minimal court costs.  Mediation costs are predictable, and are billed per session. In addition, when mediating, couples may also avoid losing time at work.  In New York, parties to a divorce are generally required to be present for all court appearances, which are typically held on weekday mornings.  Parties to mediation have greater flexibility in scheduling.  The certified divorce mediators at Petroske Riezenman & Meyers will do their best to accommodate your schedule when making mediation session appointments. Divorce Mediation often increases and improves future communication Mediation can be therapeutic.  During mediation, the parties are free to voice their concerns directly one another in the presence of a neutral third party who is trained to assist in working through the issues at hand. Working through issues directly with your spouse is likely to result in better problem-solving in the future, especially for couples who share children.  Parties that share children together often  reap the benefit of better co-parenting in the future after participating in mediation.  The ability to co-parent with your former partner is critical as it may help avoid future conflicts necessitating court intervention. During litigation, attorneys are often utilized to communicate and work through disagreements on behalf of their clients, which may hinder the parties from getting to the root cause of their disputes and moving past them.  Even worse, litigation runs the risk that a judge will render a decision that does not address either party=s needs or concerns. The Divorce Mediation process is personalized and tailored to your needs Working with a trained divorce mediator allows individuals to devote as much time and energy as they want on the issues that matter the most to them. This is not always the case during litigation, especially within the confines of an overburdened judicial system. Mediation permits each party to be an active participant in every aspect of their divorce. A successful Divorce Mediation results in a carefully planned and nuanced settlement agreement that works best for the parties, because the couple is able to decide on every facet of their separation/divorce.  A decision issued by a judge, on the other hand, is often less detailed and may not address all contingencies. Aside from the obvious benefits to being an active participant in your own settlement agreement, crafting an agreement that both people had a hand in allows for more post-divorce stability. If parties take the time to craft an agreement that is unique to their needs, the likelihood of future litigation decreases dramatically. Your case may be resolved faster through Divorce Mediation During mediation the parties control how many sessions they want to attend and how quickly or slowly they want to work through various issues.  In contrast, once a case is brought before a judge, it is restrained by the timeline set by the Court. Parties to Divorce Mediation maintain the right to full and complete financial disclosure During mediation, as in litigation, each party has the right to disclosure of information regarding all of the couples= assets and debts. If a couple has a legal issue which requires the use of an expert, such as an appraiser to determine the value of a home or business, or an actuary to value a retirement asset, the couple can and should employ these professionals.  Couples are able to take their time choosing neutral experts and reviewing reports in a non-adversarial environment, which allows them to reach the best solution for their family. The law firm of Petroske Riezenman and Meyers, P.C. has two trained and certified matrimonial mediators, Danielle N. Murray and Katelyn A. FitzMorris, who can help you and your spouse navigate the process of obtaining a divorce or separation. Our divorce mediators will help you reach an agreement that works for your family, and as licensed attorneys they can also draft the documents necessary to finalize a divorce or separation.

Parents do not always agree how to raise their children. While child rearing disagreements are certainly not unique to divorced parents, such disputes can be more difficult for divorced parents to resolve if they no longer respect or trust the other party’s opinion or, for whatever reason, they are unable to effectively communicate with one another.  Additional challenges are presented when the financial resources of the parents change after divorce and decisions affecting a child have financial repercussions, as is the case with child care. When the parents of younger children divorce, the non-custodial parent may be required to pay a pro rata share of the child care expenses incurred by the custodial parent, in addition to child support. For example, if the non-custodial parent earns $70,000 per year and the custodial parent earns $30,000 per year, the non-custodial parent will be responsible for 70% of the child care expenses incurred by the custodial parent. In such a case, the non-custodial parent, who bears the greater financial burden associated with child care, and who may already feel that he or she does not have enough left of his/her paycheck, after paying taxes, child support and child care, may be more eager to end child care than the custodial parent. In such an instance, the non-custodial parent may seek court intervention to terminate his/her obligation to contribute to child care for their child. Oftentimes, parents start to question the need for child care after a child reaches twelve years of age. There is no law, however, that conclusively determines the age that child care ends; rather, the Court will have to determine what is appropriate for the child at issue, giving due consideration of the child’s age, maturity level, the amount of time, and the time of day that the child will be left home alone. For this reason, many parents may feel they require the assistance of counsel, whether they are the parent seeking to terminate the obligation or the parent defending against such an application. Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, PC can help. Contact us at (631) 337-1977 to schedule a consultation.

Naturally, when it comes time to split stuff up in a divorce, we want to at least keep what we had before the marriage.  For the monied spouse, it’s one thing to have to give up a large percentage of assets he/she acquired during the marriage to the other spouse, whose contributions are often, at best, indirect, but its quite another to have to split up separate property --- something acquired prior to the marriage or by gift, inheritance, or personal injury award --- that is generally retained by the owning or “titled spouse.”  We like to think that separate property remains entirely separate, and the titled spouse gets to keep it all. However, distributing part of the value of a separate property asset can happen when it grows in value and some part of that growth was due to the direct and/or indirect efforts of the spouses. The appreciation of the separate asset is, to that extent --- and only to that extent --- marital property and should be divided between the parties.  The part of the appreciation or growth in value of a separate property asset that is the result of passive market forces should – if things are done right -- also remain separate property.  Unfortunately, intangible assets like business interests cannot be easily partitioned between the separate property portion (both acquisition date value and market-based appreciation), and the marital property appreciation caused by efforts of the spouses.  For the titled-spouse to retain as his separate property both it’s value on the date of acquisition, as well as the portion of the total value that is appreciation caused by passive market forces, he/she must provide expert testimony proving to the Court the extent to which passive market forces were at work in causing the value to increase.   At times, this burden is fairly easily met and no expert testimony is needed.  These are cases where it is fairly obvious that the titled spouse did not do anything that would cause an increase in value of the separate property asset.  In other words, it may appear -- just by looking at it -- that the titled-spouse’s ownership interest appreciation was entirely passive and, as a result, is entirely separate property.  In the seminal cases Price v. Price, 69 NY2d 8, and Hartog v. Hartog, 85 NY2d 36, the New York Court of Appeals wrestled with the question of how much direct effort by the titled spouse is required to tip the balance from entirely passive appreciation, where the increase in value is not at all marital property, to active appreciation where the increase in value is marital property, at least to some extent. Initially in Price, decided in 1986, the Court concerned itself with another question altogether --- whether the non-titled wife’s indirect efforts (i.e., raising children, homemaker, host/hostess, etc.) were sufficient to entitle her to receive something from the increase in value of her husband’s separate property business.  After deciding that indirect efforts were sufficient, it then made the observation that “where the appreciation is not due, in any part, to the efforts of the titled spouse but to the efforts of others or to unrelated factors including inflation or other market forces, as in the case of a mutual fund, an investment in unimproved land, or in a work of art, the appreciation remains separate property, and the non-titled spouse has no claim to a share of the appreciation.”    For example, in the context of business ownership, if the titled spouse’s interest is simply the ownership of stock so that the increase in value during the marriage is the result of “the efforts of others,” then the increase in value of the separate property business would also be separate.  But what about cases that are not so obvious, where the Husband’s or titled spouse’s involvement in the business is more – but not much more -- than merely owning stock in the company? What if the business-owning spouse, in addition to owning stock, was a corporate officer on paper only, did nothing to operate the business, but occasionally conferred with management on business decisions?  Would that be enough to swing the pendulum the other way, and make the appreciation marital property, at least to some extent? As it turns out, that would be enough, according the Court of Appeals in Hartog, where those were the exact facts concerning the Husband’s involvement in two pre-marital businesses that increased in value during the parties’ marriage.   As the Court said in Hartog, “when a non-titled spouse's claim to appreciation in the other spouse's separate property is predicated solely on the non-titled spouse's indirect contributions, some nexus between the titled spouse's active efforts and the appreciation in the separate asset is required.”  That makes sense – clearly there must be some “nexus” or causal connection between effort and increase in value, but unfortunately the Court did not provide much insight into how to determine if that nexus exists.  All it did was conclude that, in the particular case before it, the Husband’s practice of occasionally talking to his brother, who actually operated the two businesses in question, about business decisions (in addition to be an officer of those businesses on paper) was enough.  There was no discussion in the Court of Appeals decision, or in the prior decision at the intermediate level Appellate Division, of how often those discussions occurred, or how important those business decisions were. The takeaway, unfortunately, is that if you’re lucky enough to have similar facts to those in Hartog, or facts similar to those in later-decided intermediate level appellate court cases, then it’s easy to tell if there is a causal connection between efforts by the titled spouse, and increase in value of the separate property business interest.  But if it’s a close case and you don’t have facts that conveniently fit a precedent case, it’s not so easy. An appeal to common sense wouldn’t hurt, and the skill of counsel in this regard cannot be underestimated. Should a nexus between the titled spouse’s level of involvement in the business and the business’ appreciation in value be established, the next task is determining how much of the appreciation is due to passive market forces, as opposed to the efforts of the business owner.  Under Hartog, the burden of proving this distinction falls on the titled spouse.  Should the titled spouse fail to do so, all of the appreciation will be presumed to be the result of his/her active efforts, and will therefore be marital property. Incredible as it may seem, in actual practice the titled spouse usually does nothing to protect the portion of the appreciation of his or her separate property business interest that results from passive market forces.  In the usual case, the Court will only appoint a neutral forensic accountant to value the appreciation of the business, and no distinction is made between a case in which the titled spouse owned the business prior to the marriage (or otherwise came to own his/her ownership interest as separate property), and a case in which the titled spouse started the business during the marriage.  This is not an issue when the business interest is entirely marital property-- there is no need to show how much of the value is the result of passive market forces, since all of the value (both passively derived and actively obtained) is marital. However, when the business interest is in some part the separate pre-marital property of the titled spouse, a forensic accountant cannot determine the portion of the value that is the result of passive market forces.  In the usual income approach (capitalization of earnings or excess earnings methods), the accountant determines the true income attributable to the owner, capitalizes excess earnings, and then adds in the value of net tangible assets. The underlying economic forces at play that have created the business’ income and assets are generally not considered. Done properly, after the forensic accountant has determined how much the value of a separate property business interest has increased during the marriage, a second expert --- an economist --- is needed to determine how much of that appreciation was caused by identifiable and quantifiable market conditions.  Those market conditions comprise the passive portion of the appreciation, and remain the separate property of the business-owning spouse. The job of the economist is to figure out, from market data, what economic and market factors are likely to have passively influenced business performance.  However, each type of business presents different economic and market factors that are likely to have influenced business performance, in differing amounts and in differing directions.  For example, in the retail sector a very significant relationship exists between the changes in sales of jewelry and the level of changes in disposable income and unemployment levels. Data indicates that a 1.0% increase in disposable income leads to a 0.6882% increase in jewelry sales, while a 1.0% increase in unemployment reduces jewelry sales by almost 4%.   Not all retail businesses behave the same. For shoe stores, the key economic factors are population levels, debt service as a percentage of disposable income, as well as the unemployment level. A 1% increase in population leads to a 2.6% increase in shoe sales, and an increase of 1% of in debt service as a percentage of disposable personal income leads to an 8.4% increase in shoe sales.   Interestingly, the effect of unemployment level on sales is significant, but not as pronounced as with jewelry sales. For footwear, a 1% increase in the level of unemployment reduces sales by almost 2.4%. (see, “Silver in Gray Divorces,” Ashok Abbot, PhD.). There is no denying that the added cost of an economist may discourage some business-owning spouses from pursuing a valuation of the passive appreciation of their businesses.  However, consultation at the outset of the case with an experienced divorce attorney can help determine if the investment is likely to be beneficial.

Recent news about Jeff Bezos, Amazon.com’s CEO and multibillionaire, has caused a stir in many circles, including our sphere of divorce law. With a net worth of $136.2 billion dollars, Jeff Bezos is, at least for the moment, the richest man in the world. And then came the affair with news anchor Lauren Sanchez, and the recent announcement by Jeff and MacKenzie Bezos that they would be divorcing after 25 years of marriage. As residents of Washington State, a community property state, the couple will likely share equally in Mr. Bezos wealth, making MacKenzie, with a roughly $68 billion settlement, tied with her former husband as the fifth richest person in the world, according to Forbes. So what's a few billion among friends? In some places, the division of wealth in high net worth divorces is not so easily accomplished. In New York and some other states, property is divided "equitably," but not necessarily equally, as it is in community property states. Despite this distinction, in New York, most marital assets accumulated during a long term marriage are divided equally. Unfortunately for Mr. Bezos, who moved with MacKenzie from New York to Seattle to start Amazon, the most notable exception in New York to this general rule of application is the ownership of a business interest. Historically, non-titled spouses have almost uniformly received less than half of the business-owning spouse's ownership interest. Equitable distribution is often in the 25% range, with some cases spiking to 40%, but others landing in the 15% range. Case outcomes are fact-sensitive, so it falls on the attorneys to find advantageous case law precedent that most closely resembles the facts at hand. With the help of an experienced New York divorce attorney, this is generally not a problem. In most high net worth cases regardless of locale, the business interest-owning spouse has a measure of control over the business that a division of his or her shares would dilute, causing difficulties with business management. For this reason, it is often preferable to pay the non-titled spouse for his/her interest by trading other asset interests. If, however, the value of the non-titled spouse's interest in the business is greater than the business-owning spouse's interest in those other assets, than a cash payout called a distributive award may be needed. Perhaps because they resemble loans, distributive awards are often paid out with interest. Ironically, the Bezos divorce, like many high-profile CEO divorces, will be easier than most business ownership divorces, since the value of publicly traded shares is easy to determine. For most business owners, however, divorce presents a challenge in valuing the shares. The vast majority of businesses are privately or "closely" held, and there is no ready market for the sale of shares by which their value can be determined. For this reason, the first step when a closely held business interest is to be divided is to have it valued by an expert forensic accountant. In most cases, the net asset value of the business (or partial business interest) is added to the value of the goodwill the business possesses. Goodwill is valued by determining what a hypothetical investor would likely pay for the excess earnings presented by business-owning spouse's interest, where excess earnings represent the annual earnings in excess of reasonable compensation. From the standpoint of an experienced Long Island divorce lawyer and law group, we know it can get complicated, and, predictably enough, the valuations of different experts can vary widely. Of course, where valuations vary, so too does the value of non-titled spouse's share. An extreme example arose recently in a case handled by Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, where the husband's interest in a medical practice was initially valued at $44,000 by a so-called neutral forensic accountant. PR&M represented the wife and obtained an independent forensic expert who provided a valuation of nearly $1.5 million. At trial, the Court rejected the "neutral" expert's valuation and adopted the wife's expert's valuation.

We’ve all been there — said something or photographed something in an email or posted online, that we wish we hadn’t. If you’re hoping this article will make you feel better about it, I hate to disappoint. Now add to the list of ways that the past can come back to haunt you, your spouse taking your laptop and using the contents of its hard drive in a divorce litigation. According to several trial courts, its perfectly fine for your spouse to invade personal files and use the contents against you, so long as he or she is authorized to access the computer. And authorization is easy to get since all it takes is for the computer to be used by the children on occasion. In one case, the children used the computer to do their homework; in another, they watched Thomas the Tank Engine videos. It does not matter that the children are only allowed access to the computer under adult supervision; and according to one court, it also does not matter that the husband’s email account was separately password protected. In all cases where courts have found that the computer was used by children, it gave carte blanche to the other spouse to full access to the computer, including password protected email, even if you never breathed a word authorizing your spouse to use your computer. You might say Wait! isn’t it illegal to intercept communications between third parties? How can my spouse intercept my emails? You’re right, he can’t. It is illegal to wiretap or intercept electronic communication, including emails, but only if the communication is in transit when it is intercepted. Gaining access to a hard drive where emails are stored is not the same thing since the communication is no longer “live” and capable of being intercepted. A lot turns on whether the kids have slobbered on the laptop. Another interesting feature is impunity from criminal computer trespass and related criminal charges involving computers. These charges require unauthorized access to the computer. Even if you never gave your spouse permission to use your computer, courts have found that the children’s use of the computer was sufficient to confer authorization on the spouse in the context of criminal charges. Of course, with so many potential felonies hanging in the balance, if your thinking of grabbing your husband’s laptop to search for pornography, be sure that there is more than just jelly stains on the computer to prove the kids use it. You want more than your word against your spouse’s word. With so much at stake, it wouldn’t hurt if the hard drive also had videos starring trains with English accents. If you're in need of a Long Island divorce attorney contact Petroske Riezenman & Meyers, P.C. today.

A prenuptial agreement is a contract that is entered into between two people before they are married. The contract typically dictates the division of property and maintenance/support amounts and duration should the parties divorce. These contracts are especially important to any party coming into a marriage with significantly more assets than the other party or a larger earning capacity than their future spouse. It is important to have legal counsel draft these documents to help ensure that the agreement will be enforceable if they are ever needed after marriage. Often you hear about prenuptial agreement terms of celebrities who have been recently married or recently divorced. Justin Timberlake’s Wife, Jessica Biel would be provided with $500,000 if he is caught having an affair. Michael Douglas would have to provide Catherine Zeta Jones with $2,800,000 per year for every year that they were married. Kevin Federline only received $1,000,000 after his divorce from Britney Spears according to his prenuptial agreement. Even though most of us are not millionaires like these celebrities prenuptial contracts are important to people of all levels of income. Prenuptial agreements should not put a strain on a couple about to be married but rather help an engaged couple open a dialogue about finances for what will hopefully be a long and loving marriage.