Something commonly discussed during a New Jersey divorce is the need to “maintain the status quo.” In plain English, neither spouse should suddenly make major financial changes that leave the other person or the children unable to meet their regular expenses while the divorce is pending.
The goal is to keep the family financially stable until the issues can be negotiated or decided by the court.
The financial status quo is generally based on how the family’s expenses were handled before the divorce began.
Depending on the marriage, that might include payment of:
It does not necessarily mean that every expense must continue unchanged. Supporting two separate households is often more expensive than supporting one, and the same income may no longer cover everything.
The status quo is an important starting point, but it is not always the final answer.
Suppose one spouse has historically paid the mortgage, utilities and most household expenses. After the divorce is filed, that spouse suddenly stops paying some of those bills without warning.
The other spouse’s lawyer may first contact the lawyer on the other side and attempt to resolve the problem. If that does not work, the affected spouse may file a motion.
A motion is a formal request asking the judge for help. In this situation, the motion might ask the court to establish temporary financial support and require certain expenses to continue being paid while the divorce proceeds.
The spouse who stopped paying would have an opportunity to respond and explain why the prior arrangement is no longer reasonable or affordable. The judge would then consider both sides.
Financial orders entered while a divorce is pending are often called pendente lite orders. “Pendente lite” simply means “while the litigation is pending.”
These temporary orders may determine:
A temporary order does not necessarily determine what will happen in the final divorce settlement. Its purpose is to establish a workable arrangement while the case continues.
Yes. A judge may decide that the prior arrangement is no longer practical or fair.
For example, one spouse’s income may have decreased. A job may have been lost. The family may now be supporting two homes. A child’s needs may have changed, or a spouse who was previously unable to work may now have the ability to earn income.
The court may consider the family’s prior lifestyle, current income, actual expenses and each person’s ability to contribute. That is why neither spouse should assume that “maintaining the status quo” automatically means everything will remain exactly as it was before the divorce.
If one spouse unnecessarily forces the other to file a motion, the person filing may ask the judge to make the other spouse contribute toward the resulting attorney’s fees. That request is not automatically granted.
The judge may consider the parties’ finances, whether their positions were reasonable and whether either person acted in bad faith.
If the existing financial arrangement is no longer realistic, don't simply stop paying the mortgage, household bills, insurance, or other important expenses without first understanding the potential consequences.
The same applies from the other side. If your spouse suddenly stops contributing to expenses they have historically paid, you do not necessarily have to accept the new arrangement until the divorce is over.
Your attorney may be able to negotiate a temporary solution or, when necessary, ask the court to establish who should be responsible for particular expenses while the case is pending.
The goal is not to freeze every dollar of spending exactly where it was during the marriage. It is to avoid making major unilateral financial decisions that could create unnecessary problems for you, your spouse, or your children.
If you are considering divorce and want to understand support, property division, and the financial decisions you may face along the way, my free Divorce Smarter Course explains the New Jersey divorce process in plain English.
Until next time,
Steve