TALK ABOUT DIRTBAGS (OR, WHY I DON'T HANDLE DIVORCE CASES)

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Bronx injury lawyer)

I am a New York City personal injury and accident lawyer. I handle injury cases in Queens, the Bronx, Brooklyn and around the greater metropolitan area. I do not represent people in matrimonial disputes. Divorce fights can get very mean and nasty and people tend not to be happy no matter what the result; usually because they are trying to hurt and destroy each other.

The case I want to blawg about today is in today's New York Law Journal (March 5, 2010) and comes out of Suffolk County, Long Island. The title of the case is changed in the Law Journal to only show the parties' initials - M.T. v. P.T. - to protect their identities. It's for you to decide if you think the husband (or almost former husband) is a dirtbag piece of crap.

Mr. and Mrs. T. settled every issue between them except their obligations as guarantors of college student loans taken out by the children while the T.'s were married.

The two married in 1984. They have four children. Two are over age 21 and considered "emancipated," or no longer their parents' direct financial responsibility. The third is 20 years-old, has a job and lives with her boyfriend. The fourth is a high school senior.

So what's the problem? Seems that the T.'s co-signed three of their kids' college loans. Mr. T. co-signed more of the loans than Mrs. T. and, now that they're getting divorced, wants the Court to order that Mrs. T. must stand as co-signer on some of the loans guaranteed by Mr. T., to even things out - because if the T.'s had stayed married they would have handled the loans as a team. Fair? Now pay close attention.

FIRST: Mrs. T. makes the most excellent point that the T.'s never intended to pay off the loans. They only guaranteed the loans and would only have to pay if one of the T.'s children defaulted in paying off his or her loan, and this hasn't happened.

SECOND: $100,000 was given towards the children's educational expenses and $70,000 was used to pay off marital debt, all this money from a prior lawsuit brought by Mrs. T. for medical malpractice suffered by her. Mrs. T. is permanently disabled and in need of braces to stand up, although she mostly uses a wheelchair. She needs her malpractice award money to maintain her living and medical expenses, which the divorce judge notes in her decision, "both of which are extraordinary."

THIRD: Mr. T. had helped himself to over $85,000 in marital funds and gifts without Mrs. T.'s knowledge or consent.

Dear Readers: You'll be pleased to know that the judge DENIED Mr. T.'s request.