On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:40:25 -0600, USA  wrote:

>On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:46:54 GMT, Grizzlie Antagonist
> wrote:
>
>>On 14 Mar 2005 07:21:18 -0800, "Hyerdahl"
 wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>>>> > On 13 Mar 2005 14:48:01 -0800, "Hyerdahl"

>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > It's clear that Mark is not getting divorced, except in your
>>>demented
>>>> > imagination, but all other jurisdictions are
"common law"
>>>> > jurisdictions, and this includes the District of Columbia
>>>>
>>>> FYI: I live in Northern Virginia, a "red" state.
:-)  DC loses
>>>> about 20,000 people PER YEAR and is largely just a
>>>> public office community (at best.)  I was considering living there
>>>> but among other things, it has high taxes, poor shopping,
>>>> and is a far away from where I work.
>>>
>>>Actually, a marriage can be considered a "common law"
marriage in many
>>>different ways, whether or not one lives in a state that recognizes
>>>such, but then, I'm not here to make those distinctions.  :-)  And,
>>>whether or not Mark's mail order bride divorces him, isn't up to me or
>>>Dave Sim.  It's up to Mark's alleged wife.  As to DC, it has been much
>>>like Mark suggests, but has been for a very long time, and most of the
>>>red states keep losing population to the states that border the ocean.
>>>I guess more and more people want to live on the beach.  :-)
>>>> 
>>>> regards,
>>>> Mark Sobolewski
>>
>>
>>You are, as usual Puke, talking through your twat.
>>
>>I was not talking about "common law" marriages.
>>
>>I was talking about "common law jurisdictions" in terms of how
>>property is split up over marital dissolutions.
>>
>>The nine community property states will divide the marital estate up
>>50/50; 
>
>I'm looking for clarification here.  The community or marital property
>states according to their statutes will divide marital estates up
>50/50 but in practice they do not always do so.  Is that a fair
>statement in your opinion GA?  



I don't know what they do in practice.  This is not my field of
practice.

I only know that courts in community property jurisdictions are
supposed to divide the martial estate up 50/50.  That's what the law
mandates in those jurisdictions.



>>the others will divide marital property up according to whose
>>title its in or according to what seems "equitable" to
them - without
>>necessarily assuming that the non-working spouse contributed to 50% of
>>the martial property.
>>
>>And however badly you do it, you are a controlling person.  Of course,
>>you would like to have control over Mark's marriage.
>>
>>And red states have NOT been losing population, they have been
>>gaining.  George Bush gained a larger share of the electoral vote in
>>2004 than he did in 2000, pretty much by winning the same states.
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------
>>
>>grizzlieantagonist{at}yahoo.com
>>
>>"Ladies and gentlemen - let's have a round of applause for
tonight's player of the game - FRAN-CIS-CO SAN-N-N-N-TOS!
>>    - Brian Anthony (P.A. announcer at Grizzlie Stadium), June 11, 2004
>>
>>
>>"Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to
their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in
proportion as their love of justice is above their rapacity; in proportion
as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and
presumption; in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the
counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. 
Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be
placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must
be without.  It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men
of intemperate minds cannot be free.  Their passions forge their
fetters."
>>     
>>     - Edmund Burke, Letter to a Member of the National Assembly (1791)



------------------------------------

grizzlieantagonist{at}yahoo.com

"Ladies and gentlemen - let's have a round of applause for tonight's
player of the game - FRAN-CIS-CO SAN-N-N-N-TOS!
    - Brian Anthony (P.A. announcer at Grizzlie Stadium), June 11, 2004


"Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their
disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as
their love of justice is above their rapacity; in proportion as their
soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and
presumption; in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the
counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. 
Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be
placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must
be without.  It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men
of intemperate minds cannot be free.  Their passions forge their
fetters."
     
     - Edmund Burke, Letter to a Member of the National Assembly (1791)


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/15/05 4:57:04 AM ---