.webp)
Each divorce case is unique. This is true not just because every factual scenario is unique, but also because each litigant is unique. No two individuals are the same, and so just on that basis, every case will be different. One of the key things which distinguish certain litigants is how they approach their divorce. Some litigants, such as the one in Turner v. Turner (2022), don’t approach their case from a standpoint of trying to maximize their financial condition, but instead from a standpoint of making a political statement. As the Turner case shows, this approach can often have drawbacks. In this post, we will examine the Turner divorce case in detail and highlight the importance of hiring good counsel.
Quick Overview of the Divorce Case
Back in 2018, the Monday following Thanksgiving, the wife of an Upper Marlboro gentleman filed for divorce. The husband didn’t file any type of response, counter-complaint, or any motion seeking relief. Consequently, the divorce proceeded as an uncontested matter. The man eventually appeared in court for the uncontested divorce hearing; the man brought with him a companion who held a red flag and engaged in disruptive behavior. The ex-husband also engaged in disruptive behavior, and the two men each interrupted the judge on multiple occasions. Because of the ex-husband’s handling of the matter, the outcome of the case with respect to property distribution turned out to be unfavorable for the ex-husband. The ex-husband attempted to correct this situation by filing a “Motion for Reconsideration,” but this failed. Subsequently, the ex-husband filed an appeal, which was also struck down upon review.
Lessons to Extract from Turner v. Turner
Ostensibly, the behavior of the ex-husband was motivated by politics. Some individuals prefer to believe that they are “sovereign citizens,” outside the jurisdiction of U.S. courts and authorities. For that reason, those individuals may appear at a court hearing and display unusual behavior, such as the behavior shown by Mr. Turner (and his companion) in this case. The problem with this behavior, though, is that it ultimately ended up placing Mr. Turner in a worse position, because courts tend not to smile upon disruptive and antiauthoritarian behavior. Of course, every person is entitled to their opinion, and our Constitution protects freedom of expression, but our judicial system also depends on compliance from our citizenry. If citizens don’t respect the authority of our courts, then judges may have to resort to methods to gain control of this situation. This may include giving a ruling which is dissimilar from what the ruling would have been under other circumstances. In the case of Turner v. Turner, if Mr. Turner had simply hired a capable divorce attorney he would’ve been able to avoid a negative outcome. In the end, when it comes to politics, litigants will simply have to decide what is most important to them: political integrity, or concrete results in the courtroom.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Information
If you’d like to learn more, reach out to The Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-493-9116.
.png)
