I would not recommend that under ANY circumstances!
My ex met me at the bank where the notary is and we stood shoulder to shoulder and signed the papers together before the notary signed them.
Our divorce was deliciously amicable.
Have the two of you talked about the divorce recently? Really, if my spouse had talked about divorce 4 years ago and the divorce didn’t happen, and we spent some time apart and the divorce didn’t happen and I fell on hard times and moved back in with them and the divorce didn’t happen…I think I’d be pretty shocked and upset to be served with papers while s/he was surfing the net in the other room like nothing was out of the ordinary. Might want to talk to him first, and in that conversation where you let him know that now the divorce is happening, mention that you’re a bit stymied over some of the simple logistics, like should you get a process server or give him the papers after breakfast?
But you’re the only one who really knows how he’ll take it and who he’ll best take it from.
But holy crap, not your 18 year old! That’s just cruel.
OK, I know the 18 year old idea sounds awful, but in my defense, here’s how I saw it going down:
- Talk to ex, tell him I have the papers. He says ok.
- Call daughter in from other room, have her witness me handing the papers to him.
- Have daughter fill out the proof of service form.
Done.
But I totally get where you guys are coming from, and will disregard this idea.
Just curious, so did the three of you sit down at a table or something and sign the paperwork? Did your friend literally hand your ex the papers? Or did you?
I served them myself with a friend as witness. The look on her face: Priceless
Why do you say that? Most of the divorces where I have first hand knowledge are amicable enough that you don’t need to call in the sheriff to get one signature.
It was a mutual friend. He happened to be the first one to be over at the house when I had the papers ready. He signed them and then she signed them a little while later. It doesn’t even have to be notarized. I could have just forged a signature and no one would have known the difference.
I’m in CA too and, as you said, you are required to have that extra signature.
Is this something new, because I don’t remember anybody getting served any papers during my divorce. I mean, it wasn’t a surprise, we shared a lawyer and went to the hearing together. Maybe a dissolution is handled differently?
I did this for some friends of mine who are getting divorced just a few days ago. I helped her fill out the papers then handed them to him at his house. However, I think it’s very strange and presumptuous to assume that this is a good idea for everyone’s situation.
This times a bunch. I’m surprised it’s even legally acceptable to saddle a non-professional with that, and if I had a friend or relative who was in that kind of business, I wouldn’t want to put them in the position of being “the bad guy”.
There’s a lot of confusion about “serving” divorce papers. The following comments apply to my state, your state may have different rules.
-
No fault divorce papers are not “Served”, do not include a summons, and there is no obligation to sign them, or to consent to anything in them. A no fault divorce cannot be granted without consent from both parties. It is possible to consent to a no fault divorce, but allow the Court to decide custody/visitation/support and division of marital property/debt.
-
Fault based divorce papers do include a summons, must be served on the opposing party, and require a written answer to be filed with the Court and provided to the other party within a specified, relatively short period of time. If no answer is filed, that party forfeits any right to further notice of divorce proceedings. I always include no fault as an alternative ground for divorce, and most cases will eventually settle out on a no fault basis, but serving a fault divorce triggers time limits for responses and helps to move the process along.
-
Process may be served by anyone of legal age, who is not a party to the lawsuit, and not a convicted felon. I generally use a process server. The only time I even consider using a family member is when the situation is not at all volatile and cost is a concern…note that my process server only charges $35 for local (same county) service, and has very reasonable rates outside of the county. For volatile situations, I use the Sheriff’s department to serve process. If the defendant wants to get stupid with a deputy, it just makes my job easier.
It’s not new at all here. Obviously every state is different. In CA, a third party has to serve the papers. At a minimum, it’s just a random person who signs it.
Me too. It’s a good thing that no one has made that assumption.
One more thing. In CA, a divorce and a dissolution are the same thing. Technically, there isn’t such a thing as a divorce. They’re all dissolutions.
In my state, “sharing a lawyer” is not possible in a divorce. A lawyer can’t represent both sides. I can represent one party, and the other party can represent themselves if they so chose, but the paperwork will reflect that I represented my client, and the other party received no legal advice from me.
In CA, where the OP lives, sharing a lawyer is legal and very common in friendly divorces. It’s a shame that that’s not the case everywhere. Good for lawyers but bad for society.
My old neighbors used the same lawyer. They walked into the office with a list of who wanted what, and signed the final papers 90 days later.
I understand that it is allowed in some places, but I disagree that it’s a good thing. One lawyer cannot represent both sides, and in a divorce, no matter how “friendly”, the parties have adversarial interests.
Wasn’t the OP’s relative presuming so when s/he suggested that anyone who uses a process server has “no friends”?
Yet it worked perfectly for me and my ex and we saved a few hundred dollars in lawyer’s fees which admittedly sucks for the lawyers in this State. We just needed someone to make sure that the paperwork was correct. The people who do this work refer to themselves as mediators but they are licensed attorneys. They operate under certain rules. Our mediator made it clear that he wouldn’t have any conversations more detailed than “the next meeting will be on Tuesday at 9am” without both parties present and that if he realized that things weren’t actually that “friendly” he would advise us to each get our own council. I can’t imagine how paying more money to two different lawyers would have served our interests better but, again, it certainly is a bad thing for the greater legal community.
I don’t know about other States but here in California we are able to do our own divorces. This guy in the 1970’s put out a guide on how to do that which is updated every year or so and is still a great seller. He got his law degree with the intent of helping people and went into family law. After a year or two he realized that (1) most people have simple enough divorces that the could easily do it themselves and (2) the legal community was fucking people by making seem complicated. His personal ethics couldn’t take it any more so he quit his job and wrote the do it yourself guide.
As soon as it was published the California Bar tried to block it under the guise that then regular people would be “practicing law without a license” :rolleyes: Luckily the CPAs in our fine State tried to do the same thing to some guy who wrote guide on how to do taxes and were thwarted and that precedent allowed the book to go through. The result is a net gain of probably millions of dollars from lawyers to the people who have simple and friendly divorces.
OK, that system is a little different than what I thought you were describing. There, it appears that each side is representing themselves, and the attorney is not actually representing anybody. The attorney is functioning in a quasi-judicial role, as a mediator, with protections to prevent the appearance of impropriety.
My ex and I didn’t need a lawyer because we actually did agree about everything, including child support and physical custody, and I can fill out papers as well as the next literate person.
What we could have used - what would have saved my time and the courts - was someone to tell me things that aren’t on the paperwork, like, “Yes, you’re correct that your ex doesn’t have to appear in court if he doesn’t want to, but his “appearance fee” of $350 has to be paid even if he doesn’t appear,” and “The judge is going to want to see a written schedule for custody including holidays that your family doesn’t observe like Christmas and Easter.”
Once I - slowly - learned all that not exactly legal stuff, the paperwork wasn’t too dreadful, and we did do it pro se. (Or rather, I did, and he signed the papers where I pointed.) HOWEVER, given the OP’s history of being a total doormat in this relationship, it’s not something I’d recommend for her. She needs someone to fight for her, 'cause she doesn’t do it for herself.