Archive for the 'Divorce' Category

Orr vs Orr: The US Supreme Court Landmark Judgment On Alimony-Mar ’79

The significance of this judgment is that it rejected the premise that married women are necessarily dependent upon their husbands for financial support.

Lillian and William Orr divorced in Alabama on 26 February 1974. The decree directed William to pay Lillian $1,240 per month in alimony. Soon he either fell behind or stopped paying altogether, and Lillian brought contempt proceedings against him in the Circuit Court of Lee County, Alabama, demanding back payments.
In defense, William claimed that Alabama’s alimony statutes violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, since they required only husbands–never wives–to pay alimony. Lillian believed the law was constitutional. The court agreed with her and ordered William to pay the back alimony plus Lillian’s legal fees. William promptly appealed the judgment to the Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
On 16 March 1977, the court ruled that alimony laws–“designed” to help “the wife of a broken marriage who needs financial assistance”–were constitutional. The judgment against William must stand. William next petitioned the Supreme Court of Alabama for a writ of certiorari–an order that the lower court send the trial records to the superior court for review. In May, the state supreme court granted this writ–only to reverse itself six months later, saying the writ had been “improvidently granted.” William then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.

The US Supreme Court concluded the discussion with a few remarks about women’s “proper place”:

“Legislative classifications which distribute benefits and burdens on the basis of gender carry the inherent risk of reinforcing stereotypes about the “proper place” of women and their need for special protection .. . Thus, even statutes purportedly designed to compensate for and amelioratethe effects of past discrimination must be carefully tailored. Where, as here, the State’s compensatory and ameliorative purposes are as well served by agender-neutral classification as one that gender classifies and therefore carries with it the baggage of sexual stereotypes, the State cannot be permitted to classify on the basis of sex.”

A Divorce Decision Changes the Meaning of Marriage
The laws governing marriage are more often evaluated during divorce proceedings than during the life of an intact marriage. Thus, in settling the Orrs’ dispute about their divorce decree, the Supreme Court radically changed the legal basis of marriage in America. As editor Leslie Friedman Goldstein points out, Anglo-American law had held that the “legal core” of marriage was a woman’s obligation to provide sexual and domestic services and a man’s obligation to provide financial support. The Court’s ruling in Orr v. Orr was a complete rejection of such assumptions and one that, in Goldstein’s words, “seismically altered” the marriage institution.”

Here is the link to the analysis of this judgment: Orr v. Orr

Here is the link to the full text : Orr Vs Orr, Full Text

_______________________________________

SC Dismisses The Review Petition Of Mrs. Swarup Sarkar

Here it is:

ITEM NO.CHAMBER MATTER                        SECTION XVIA

        SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 735 OF 2007 IN T.P.(C) 32/2007

SUSHMITA SARKAR                            Petitioner(s)

              VERSUS

SWARUP SARKAR                              Respondent(s)

Date: 22/08/2007 This Petition was circulated today.

CORAM :
   HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE ARIJIT PASAYAT
   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.H. KAPADIA

                             By Circulation

      UPON perusing papers the Court made the following
                ORDER

                   The review petition is dismissed in terms of the signed

        order.

                   (Neena Verma)                           (Vijay Aggarwal)
              Court Master                         Court Master

                             Signed order is placed on the file.
             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
              CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

                   REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.735 OF 2007

                                  IN

                         TRANSFER PETITION (C) NO.32 OF 2007

Sushmita Sarkar                                    ....... Petitioner

                         Versus

Swarup Sakar                                       ....... Respondent

                     ORDER

          We have carefully gone through the review petition and the connected

papers. We do not find any merit in the petition for review. The same shall stand

accordingly dismissed.

                                                   ...................J.
                                                   (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)

                                                ...................J.
New Delhi,                              (S.H. KAPADIA)
August 22, 2007.

______________________________________________

SC: Concensual Sex Not Rape

NOTE: I sourced this judgment from a dynamic young lawyer.

I am amazed that it took the Supreme Court to drill some sense into the women who willingly consent to a sexual relationship and then scream ‘rape’ when the marriage doesn’t materialize.

We are turning into a land of promiscuous morons and wannabe victimized virgins.

Here is the link to the HT article

Here is the judgment: SC: Concensual Sex Not Rape

_____________________________________

Woman Fined For Abusing DV Act

The original article has been taken down by The Statesman.

You can read the pdf, think of it like a news clipping, here: Woman Fined For Abusing DV Act

_______________________________________________

LATimes: Post Divorce Women May Have It Worse

This is a great article by LATimes on the financial outlook of post divorce women. The original link is lost, but I had saved a copy of it.
————————————

Old story: Women may have it worse

Divorce and lost earning time could put living standards in a free fall late in life.

You can read the rest of the article here: Old story: Women may have it worse

______________________________________

A Guide To Divorcing The Modern Desi Woman

Here is the link: Fire Your Wife

You need to buy the book from this site and they accept USD only. Sorry guys, can’t do more than this. The book talks about how to prepare for divorcing the American woman.
How does it apply to the desi situation? I’ll explain.
I now believe that there are more Americans in India than in America. Our country is on a downward spiral, morally and sexually and I think, inspite of our moronic laws that make ditching the witch difficult, some of these ideas at this site may apply. So check out that site to get some ideas on how to ditch your desi biwi.

PS:
Also read the Survivors Guide To IPC498A to prepare for the inevitable 498A and DV act that will follow once you file for the divorce.

________________________________

Domestic Violence: Online Books From Questia

These books are from the online library. You need to negotiate through the window. Unfortunately couldn’t download it.

______________________________


Visitors Since Mar/14/07

  • 3,250,386

Cluster Map

Live Traffic

Archives

Top Rated Posts

Some Interesting Stats On Arrests Of Women

In 1930, the British govt arrested 17,000 women for their involvement in the Dandi Yatra (Salt March). During 1937 to 1947 (10 Years), they arrested 5,000 women involved in the freedom struggle. From 2004 to 2006, the govt of India arrested 90,000 women of all ages under 498A. On the average, 27,000 women per year are being arrested under this flawed law. These are stats from the NCRB.

Copyright Notice:

The content of this blog is copyrighted. You are required to obtain prior permission before locally hosting or reproducing online or in print, any or part of the content. You are welcome to directly link to the content from your site. Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape MyFreeCopyright.com Registered & Protected Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

Disclaimer:

The family of the writer was tortured by the Indian Police in an attempt to extort over a $100,000 by holding them in custody for over a week. The police, in cahoots with the magistrate and the PP, did this due to the ridiculous allegations made in a 498A case by his embittered ex-wife. She filed the case years after he and his family had last seen her. Thousands of 498A cases are filed each year in India by women seeking to wreak vengeance on their husbands and in-laws. Enormous sums are extorted from intimidated families implicated in these cases by corrupt Indian police officers and elements of the Indian judiciary. The author and his family haven't bribed any public official nor have they given in to the extortion. This blog aims to raise awareness of due process in India. The content of this blog constitutes, opinions, observations, and publicly available documents. The intent is not to slander or defame anyone or any institution and is the manifestation of the author's right to freedom of expression – with all the protections this right guarantees.

Get Adobe Acrobat Reader

You will need adobe acrobat to read most of the documents. Please download adobe acrobat reader. Get Adobe Acrobat For Your System
December 2018
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

%d bloggers like this: