I might be getting seriously involved with a man who is a gambler. I have
considerable assets and I was wondering if there would be any way I wouldn't be
responsible for his gambling debts if I ever married the man. Would my other
assets such as a house, and money be able to be well protected from his getting
a hold of them if I were to marry him?

In article <20041114120310.08355.00000617@mb-m04.aol.com>, Graphxgal77
<graphxgal77@aol.com> wrote:
I might be getting seriously involved with a man who is a gambler. I have considerable assets and I was wondering if there would be any way I wouldn't be responsible for his gambling debts if I ever married the man. Would my other assets such as a house, and money be able to be well protected from his getting a hold of them if I were to marry him?

Debts incurred after the marriage are _community_ debts, in most
states.

This actually makes sense, since money flows freely and unauditably
between husband and wife: were he able to declare bankruptcy just on
"his" debts, this would enable him to funnel "winnings" to you and keep
his "losses" on "his" side, and then declare bankruptcy, thus
sheltering the money.

Which is why community property laws recognize debts as being shared
(if acquired after the marriage...you are not responsible for his
earlier debts, nor, generally, can you claim a significant share of his
assets accumulated before the marriage).


Check your local state laws...before hiring a lawyer (which is the
simplistic advice usually given on the Net), Google your state's laws
for language about community property, debts, etc.

--Tim May

Graphxgal77 wrote: I might be getting seriously involved with a man who is a gambler. I have considerable assets and I was wondering if there would be any way I wouldn't be responsible for his gambling debts if I ever married the man. Would my other assets such as a house, and money be able to be well protected from his getting a hold of them if I were to marry him?
You'd be crazy (!!!) to become involved with such a man.If you were to
attend a few Gamblers Anonymous meetings,you'd learn that abject misery
is almost always the result.

Keep in mind that gamblers do,among other things,steal from strangers,
employers,friends,relatives and...yes...even spouses.Forgery is one of
the more common means they use in such endeavors.

I'd encourage you to walk....no,RUN...away from this man!

On 14 Nov 2004, Tim May <timcmay@got.net> wrote:
Debts incurred after the marriage are _community_ debts, in most states.

This statement is (seriously) incorrect and therefore misleading.

In article <4198e842.55774748@news.east.earthlink.net>,
<nospam@isp.com> wrote:
On 14 Nov 2004, Tim May <timcmay@got.net> wrote: Debts incurred after the marriage are _community_ debts, in most states. This statement is (seriously) incorrect and therefore misleading.

Whether in a community property state or an equitable distribution
state, debts incurred by one party after a marriage--which is the
situation the woman was asking about, as she was worrying about his
being a gambler if and after they marry--have the same status as
property (assets) acquired after the marriage.

Which was my point, that there is not, and cannot be, some special
separation between positive assets and negative assets.

Google has much on this subject. Here are two excerpts:

(excerpt from Nolo)

"How are property and debts divided at divorce?

It is common for a divorcing couple to decide about dividing their
property and debts themselves (with or without the help of a neutral
third party like a mediator), rather than leave it to the judge. But if
a couple cannot agree, they can submit their property dispute to the
court, which will use state law to divide the property.

Division of property does not necessarily mean a physical division.
Rather, the court may award each spouse a percentage of the total value
of the property. (It is illegal for either spouse to hide assets in
order to shield them from property division.) Each spouse will get
personal property, assets, and debts the total net worth of which*add
up to his or her percentage.

Courts divide property under one of two basic schemes: community
property or equitable distribution. Community debts are divided
according to the same principles.

€ Community property. In Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho,
Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington,Wisconsin and Puerto
Rico, all property of a married person is classified as either
community property (owned equally by both spouses) or the separate
property of one spouse. At divorce, community property is generally
divided equally between the spouses, while each spouse keeps his or her
separate property.

€ Equitable distribution. Assets and earnings accumulated during
marriage are divided equitably (fairly). In practice, often two-thirds
of the assets go to the higher wage earner and one-third to the other
spouse. Equitable distribution principles are followed everywhere
except the community property states listed above.
<http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/article.cfm/ObjectID/C75906FE-22D5-4
85C-BF77170850E16820/catID/101C121B-3FFB-42F9-B60C2CC50B6921C6>


"Debts incurred during the marriage are also generally community debts,
even if only one of the spouses signed for the debt. The exceptions are
debts incurred for the purchase of real estate, leases and guarantees
on debts which must be signed for by both spouses. Community debts are
the obligation of both of the spouses and both are liable for them in
the event of a dissolution of marriage. The judge or the parties can
allocate responsibility for payment of the community debts in a
dissolution of marriage decree. However, the other spouse may still be
liable to the creditor for the debt if it is not paid, as a contract
liability."
<http://www.tedlock.com/html/faq/debts.html>

Tim May wrote:
Debts incurred after the marriage are _community_ debts, in most states.

No. Not even in community property states, which is not
"most states".

Tim May wrote:
"Debts incurred during the marriage are also generally community debts, even if only one of the spouses signed for the debt.

WRONG. Well, perhaps that's the "general rule", but it's not generally
true of most debts.

It's heavily dependent on your state of residence.

In community property states the property you bring in with you is SOMETIMES
untouchable by the spouse, with MANY exceptions. Such as if you have money
from outside the marriage and commingle it with money that your or your
spouse earns while you are married, it may lose its independence. etc. etc.

I hate it when people recommend lawyers here, because that always strikes me
as a cop-out, but in this case if you strongly feel that you want to protect
your ***(ets) you should contact one.

--
Falky
San Diego, Calif.
----------------
Disclaimer: This has been the opinion of a law student, not a lawyer.
Author advises each reader to get the opinion of a legal professional.
This post is not intended to be legal advice.



"Graphxgal77" <graphxgal77@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041114120310.08355.00000617@mb-m04.aol.com... I might be getting seriously involved with a man who is a gambler. I have considerable assets and I was wondering if there would be any way I
wouldn't be responsible for his gambling debts if I ever married the man. Would my
other assets such as a house, and money be able to be well protected from his
getting a hold of them if I were to marry him?

On 15 Nov 2004, Tim May <timcmay@got.net> wrote:
<nospam@isp.com> wrote: Tim May <timcmay@got.net> wrote: Debts incurred after the marriage are _community_ debts, in most states. This statement is (seriously) incorrect and therefore misleading. Whether in a community property state or an equitable distribution state, debts incurred by one party after a marriage--which is the situation the woman was asking about, as she was worrying about his being a gambler if and after they marry--have the same status as property (assets) acquired after the marriage. Which was my point, that there is not, and cannot be, some special separation between positive assets and negative assets. Google has much on this subject. Here are two excerpts . . . [SNIPPED here but see original posting if interested].

Ah - the ease with which conclusory self-stated certainty is too often
substituted for actually experienced-based/verified knowledge! -

Mr. May is here (seriously!) (self)confusing himself (and also the OP)
by contunuing to conflate
- legally married spouses' rights/obligations to/aganst one
another (but, at that, without addressing whether they will/won't have
negotiated/signed and also [or failed to] implement This or That pre-
or post-marital agreement) with
- the (different/separate) issue (he appears not to know is
directly addressed in the OP's state [NY] by a quite specific
statutory provision) whether a legally married woman's pre- and
post-marital "separate property" (and the income/profits earned
thereon) "shall not be subject to her husband's control or disposal"
and that she shall "no[t be] liable for his debts" (re. which see,
N.Y. Dom. Reln's Law § 50).

( The "Google" material to which Mr. May refers deals with the former
[inter-spousal rights/obligations] not the latter; although, of course
[and as noted elsewhere], whether/how, as a practical matter, the OP
should/can try to protect herself is a different question, although it
is one that cannot be reliably addressed solely on the basis of her so
far factually skeletal posting. )