Trials and hearings, in New York divorces, can be on the topics of grounds, custody, support and equitable distribution. While the majority of cases settle prior to trial, many trials are still necessary on some or all of the issues. Although other hearings are possible, such as on contempt or modifications of orders, the aforementioned are the most common. All of the issues may be heard together or handled at different times. For example, if grounds are disputed, a court may schedule a grounds trial right away since if grounds do not exist, then the rest of the divorce is a moot point as it cannot proceed.
Grounds are rarely an issue nowadays since the passage of the No-Fault law in 2010 which merely requires one party to the case to be able to swear that the marriage has been irretrievably broken for at least six months. However, if a party insists on fault based grounds that are disputed, a trial might be necessary on those grounds if disputed. As a New York City and Long Island Divorce Lawyer, I found myself in a grounds trial soon after the passage of the No-Fault law since the other side insisted on pursuing fault based grounds. Another possible grounds trial could be on the issue if a party substantially complied with a separation agreement when divorces are sought based on the grounds that the parties have lived apart pursuant to a legal separation for at least one year.
So, what evidence is admissible at a divorce trial? For the most part, these rules of evidence apply at most civil trials whether on a divorce, family court matter or otherwise. In general, all relevant evidence is admissible, unless it should be excluded based on some rule of evidence. Irrelevant evidence should not be admitted at trial if objected to by the opposing side or the trier of fact (judge). Evidence that has a reasonable tendency to show or not show the existence of a fact necessary to the decision on a matter is relevant. If a bit of evidence seems to be from a non-reliable source, usually it would still be deemed admissible, however it might not carry a lot of weight. What value to give the evidence is for the court to decide. However, even relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, undue delay or waste of time. Continue reading ›