Something that is usually treated as a “given” during the pendency of a divorce is the concept of “maintenance of the status quo”.
Usually judges rule that each side of a divorce case has an obligation to maintain the status quo that existed prior to anybody filing for divorce.
This must continue throughout the divorce proceeding.
By way of example, let’s assume that a divorcing husband were to unilaterally cut back on some some part of the financial support that he’s historically given to his wife.
The wife might well have her lawyer call or write to the husband’s lawyer.
The wife’s threat would be that if the husband did not start paying again, they would file a “motion” with the Court.
A motion is simply a request of a judge by a litigant for help.
A motion can be customized to any particular need that the litigant has.
In this case, they would create a motion to request that the judge require the husband to continue to maintain the financial status quo that existed.
The husband’s lawyer would fight back.
Perhaps he would respond by saying, “Judge, the status quo isn't fair anymore. Maintaining the status quo is certainly appropriate in many cases, but it's not appropriate here. Here's why it's not appropriate here.”
And the husband’s lawyer would spell out their argument.
Then the wife’s lawyer would respond to the husband’s lawyer’s argument.
By way of example, perhaps the wife’s lawyer filed their motion, essentially saying, “judge he's got a legal duty to maintain the financial status quo during the divorce, he stopped doing it, we were respectful, we called the husband’s lawyer, we brought it to his attention but he couldn't convince his client to change his mind.
We then wrote to the husband’s lawyer but he still couldn't convince his client to change his mind.Judge, we were forced to file this motion to simply require the husband to maintain the status quo, which we all know he's required to do anyway during the pendency of this divorce case.
Therefore judge, please, number one, order him to maintain the status quo.
Second, please require the husband to reimburse my client the $5,421.22 that she to pay to my me to file this motion to make him do what he should have done voluntarily.”
There some situations where the status quo can be modified during a divorce if the judge feels that it is appropriate to do so.
For example, perhaps a man is married to a woman who's chosen not to work at all for the last 10 years but before that she was earning $60,000 a year as a high school teacher.
The child just started college shortly before the divorce action was filed.
The husband could go into Court based on that “substantial change in circumstances” and say, “Judge, based upon the fact that the child is no longer home now, there's been a change in circumstances.
I want you to put a schedule in place which gives the wife 6 months to obtain employment. And once she obtains employment, there should be a gradual reduction of my client’s status quo financial obligations to her.”
That may be viewed by the judge as a “substantial change in circumstances” that could justify her entering an order that changes the status quo.