Newsroom
2020
Presented by Lisa Hughes, and others, on the topic of Death and Divorce.
2019
Lisa Hughes is working hand in hand with Senator John Morlach writing new legislation to simplify family law litigation which was turned upside down by the Sanchez ruling. The goal of this new legislation authored collectively with Lisa Hughes will remedy this issue effective January 1, 2020.
The Divorce Rate Is at a 40-Year Low, Unless You're 55 or Older
Younger married couples are less likely to split up, but 'gray' divorces among older couples are on the rise. Divorce rates are at a 40-year low. One cause, researchers believe, is that people are delaying marriage.
By: Jo Craven McGinty. June 21, 2019 7:30 am ET <https://www.wsj.com/news/author/8046>
It's June, one of the most popular months of the year to marry. So perhaps it's time we talked about divorce. In 2017, around one million couples in the U.S. called it quits <https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/RBT/charting-us-divorce-rate-2008-2017.pdf?mod=article_inline>. That may sound like a lot of busted unions, but the rate of divorce <https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/national-marriage-divorce-rates-00-17.pdf?mod=article_inline> - just like the rate of marriage- is down.
Today, younger married couples are less likely to split up than they once were, driving the trend. But, at the same time, the rate of divorce for older generations has increased in a phenomenon known as "gray" divorce.
Divorces hit a historical high point in 1979, when 22.6 marriages out of every 1,000 broke up, according to researchers at the National Center for Family and Marriage Research at Bowling Green University. <https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/do cuments/FP/schweizer-geo-var-divorce-rate-fp-18-21.pdf?mod=article_inline>
By 2017, the rate had dropped to 16.1 divorces for every 1,000 marriages. That's a decrease of 29% from the high point and the lowest the divorce rate has been in 40 years. One cause, researchers believe, is that people are delaying marriage. "There's a fear of divorce or a specter of divorce looming large in people's minds," said Wendy D. Manning, co-director of Bowling Green's Center for Family and Marriage Research. "They don't want to make a mistake. They're waiting longer to get married to divorce-proof their marriage."
In 1963, the average woman married at around age 20, according to Tera R. Jordan, an associate professor of human development and family studies at Iowa State University. By 2017, the median age at marriage was 27 for women and 29 for men.
Using data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics and the American Community Survey, Bowling Green researchers calculated annual rates of divorce for girls and women ages 15 and older by dividing the number divorced in the past 12 months by the number divorced in the past 12 months plus the number currently married and then multiplying the result by 1,000. They also examined the trends by age group and found that the drop in divorces has been driven by younger people.
The greatest decrease they observed was among 15- to 24-year-olds, whose divorce rate dropped by 43%, from 47 divorces per 1,000 marriages in 1990 to 27 divorces per 1,000 marriages in 2017. The rate for 25- to 34-year-olds also dropped substantially, from 33 divorces per 1,000 marriages to 23 divorces per 1,000 marriages, a decrease of about 30%.
The rates for the next two age groups changed only slightly, dropping from 23 to 21 divorces per 1,000 marriages for 35- to 44-year-olds and rising from 13 to 15 divorces per 1,000 marriages for 45- to 54-year-olds. After that, the rates of "gray divorce" more than doubled. For 55- to 64-year-olds, it climbed from 5 divorces per 1,000 marriages to 15 divorces per 1,000 marriages, and for those 65 and older, it rose from 1.8 to 5. "It represents the baby boomers," Dr. Manning said. "A lot married young. A lot are in second marriages. Second marriages are at greater risk of divorce."
For comparison, the researchers also calculated marriage rates. In 1970, nearly a decade before the divorce peak, there were 76.5 marriages for every 1,000 unmarried women. In 2017, the rate had dropped to 32.2 marriages for every 1,000 unmarried women, a decrease of 58%.
"The script was high school, maybe the military or college, and then you settle down," Dr. Jordan said. "Now, it's high school, maybe the military or college, maybe some period of self-discovery." That doesn't mean fewer people have been pairing up or even delaying entering into romantic partnerships. But instead of marrying right after high school or college, more couples have simply moved in together, usurping marriage as the most common relationship experience <https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/lamidi-manning-marriage-cohabitation-young-adults-fp-16-17.pdf?mod=article_inline> in young adulthood.
Forty percent of women who wedded for the first time between 1980 and 1984 lived with their husband before they married <https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/hemez-manning-30-yrs-change-women-premarital-cohab-fp-17-05.pdf?mod=article_inline>, according to the Bowling Green researchers. From 2010 through 2014, 70% did. (This only counts women who eventually married and reported living with their spouse ahead of tying the knot.)
The median age for couples who live together outside of marriage is around 22, Dr. Manning said, and the relationships traditionally last only two or three years. That suggests for more couples, "I do" has morphed into, "I might." But when they finally pledge "till death do us part," they mean it.
Write to Jo Craven McGinty at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
2018
TAX CHANGE (TCJA) AND FAMILY LAW, INTENDED AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES or WHAT DID THEY DO TO MY DIVORCE!
By: Bruce Hughes, CPA Attorney; Lisa Hughes CPA Attorney CFLS and Alexandra Ascuena, CPA
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”) made many significant changes to the Internal Revenue Code. We do not address all of them here. This article addresses the many issues affecting divorcing couples contained within the TCJA. Some of the issues are direct and some are indirect or unintended. An example of the direct affect is the elimination of the alimony deduction to the payor and elimination of the taxability of alimony to the payee. An example of the indirect affect is the impact on business valuations in a family law context. An example of the unintended consequence is the amendments to prenuptial agreements and post marital agreements which have a stated amount or limitation for spousal support, which was based on the deductibility of the support payments.
Spousal support, for 76 years (since 1942) has generally been ordered payable from the higher earning spouse to the lower earning spouse.
Prior to December 31, 2018, the payor spouse was often willing to pay higher support, in settlements, to settle a case because support was deductible. The TCJA will make the potential for pre trial resolution more difficult, not solely due to the non taxability, but to the collection of issues below, including the limitations of home ownership expenses and miscellaneous deduction losses.
Beginning January 1, 2019, spousal support and family support resulting from new court orders (no prior support order) will no longer be deductible to the payor nor taxable to the payee. Older support orders from an earlier date may come under this provision by agreement between the parties, otherwise they will continue to be deductible to the payor and taxable to the payee. Temporary orders (pendente lite) made before December 31, 2018, and made final after January 1, 2019, will come under the prior law as deductible to the payor and taxable to the payee. It is recommended that language such as the following be inserted in modifications of pre December 31, 2018 orders:
“The parties hereto expressly desire that the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code existing immediately preceding the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act apply to all alimony or maintenance payments made or modified herein”. 1
The paradigm shift in expectation of support to match the monthly bills which are due will result in confusion and upset. The paying spouse will no longer deduct spousal support and the receiving spouse will no longer pay federal income tax on the support. In States like California, New York, New Jersey and other high tax states, there will likely remain a benefit to the receiving spouse who will not pay state income taxes 2. As a bargaining tool this presents problems for the attorney. The paying spouse will lose the deduction for both spousal support and for the higher resulting state income taxes resulting in less after tax income by a significant amount in the high SALT 3states (where state tax conforms to federal).
In the past, the attorney could advise the client that spousal support paid is deductible, the government is in effect paying part of the support paid to the supported spouse by shifting the tax due from the typically higher bracket payor to the lower bracket recipient. We could also discuss with a client the fact that family support is deductible, which permitted significant balancing between the spouses. Family support 4will not longer be deductible for new orders or agreements made after December 31, 2018.
There will be the possibility for lump sum settlements as being more valuable than a stream of non deductible payments and a lower amount to pay in a lump sum since these new support amount will be smaller, but our experience with this expectation is that this will be a harder sell due to the reduced amount of support being offered.
Since alimony is based on income available to the payor, TCJA changes some business deductions, but how should they be handled in a family law context? For example, entertainment expenses, which are directly related to the business purpose, are no longer deductible for income tax purposes, but they should still be appropriate business expenses for family law cash flow calculation and will be part of the income normalization process by CPAs testifying to the amount of cash flow available.
CHILD TAX CREDIT
In prior law there was a refundable child tax credit in the amount of $1,000. This has been doubled to $2,000 of which $1,400 per child is refundable, pursuant to a formula based on “earned income”. Under prior law there was an AGI limitation of $110,000, over which the child tax credit was phased out. Current law increases this AGI limitation of $400,000 for joint returns. A child remains defined at less than 17 years old on the last day of the tax year.
While regulations and revised forms are not yet available, it appears that the filing of form 8332 (based on 1040 instructions for line 6c) will qualify the children for this credit. If the payee spouse had no taxable income, as the only income is non taxable support, then this transfer of the dependency will benefit the payor if the payor’s AGI is less than $200,000 or $400,000 for a joint return.
PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENTS
Over the past few decades, prenuptial agreements which limit spousal support have been determined to be legal in most jurisdictions, with the caveat that in California, courts will determine the enforceability of this provision at the time, in the future, when enforcement is asserted by one of the parties.
Support limitations in prenuptial agreements very likely used the tax law of the past and predicated the support amount (if stated in the agreement or as a percent of income) based on the tax deductibility to the payor and taxability to the payee. Without marital agreements or prenuptial agreement amendments, this will present an issue for the payor as these agreements are not court orders (nor are they divorce or separation instruments) and will be found to be non-deductible if court orders are made after January 1, 2019. For example, these prenuptial agreements which state that support shall be payable in the amount of $7,500 per month or 20% of pre tax income will likely be paying far more than they bargained for due to the tax change.
Some portions of any property agreement may also be implicated. For example the assignment of a residence with a mortgage and property taxes, bargained for with an understanding that these liabilities would be paid for with spousal support in the event of divorce. The unfortunate issue which this presents is that amendments to these agreements must be in writing and executed by both parties. In addition, due to the fiduciary duties owed by spouses, one to the other, these agreements are best amended when both sides have an attorney to advise their client. Without an attorney representing both sides in a support amendment, the amendment may not be valid.
IRA
Contributions to an IRA are made based on earned income. Payee spouses may no longer be able to contribute to this retirement account, unless they use a Roth IRA. However, if the payee has otherwise earned income, they may be able to use the tax free spousal support to fund a traditional IRA to further reduce income taxes (assuming no conflict with work funded retirement and income thresholds).
EMPLOYMENT
Payor spouses who are self employed may opt to employ the payee spouse in lieu of a support obligation (of course this should entail actual employment or it is an invitation to an audit). We often see self employed payors inquiring about substituting their support obligation as compensation, permitting health insurance and retirement contributions for their former spouses. However, employment wages remain taxed while support is tax free under the TCJA.
LEGAL FEES
Fees paid to the payee’s attorney to obtain spousal support are no longer deductible.
EXEMPTIONS
Dependency exemptions are gone. These were important in the dissolution context as bargaining chips, as the exemption was divisible or assignable between the spouses to alternatively give them tax benefits.
529 ACCOUNTS
529 Accounts can now be used to pay for post secondary home schooling (not K-12) expenses as well as private schooling. Since up to $10,000 per year may be used to pay tuition and schooling expenses per student, this potentially becomes a control issue for these funds in a divorce. Non deductible contributions to a 529 account may be used to pay for tuition, books, room and board, computer technology and related equipment as well as internet access for public, private or religious schools. Elementary and secondary school costs are limited to tuition expenses only. The earnings of a 529 account are tax free and the withdrawals for the above qualified expenses are tax free withdrawals.
PROPERTY
What is the effect on negotiations if payee is awarded the house and will be responsible for interest on the mortgage, property taxes and state income taxes, but has no taxable income to deduct from? This will impact the ability to settle matters as the receiving spouse may not be able to pay these obligations with tax free, but reduced support amounts. There may be more real estate on the market as divorced spouses “downsize” due to the impact of the TJCA on home ownership.
Pass through entity, Qualified Business Income (QBI) .
This issue affects support in a few ways. Qualified Business Income is taxed as pass through business income at a lower rate than wages. For Qualified Business Income, the tax payer is able to deduct 20% of the income (after AGI) to reduce their taxable income. The rationale here is that small businesses need to compete with larger businesses, which receive a tax reduction to just 21% for Sub chapter C Corporations. There are however, limitations to Qualified Business Income. First is a wage and capital limitation and second is whether the business is a specified service trade or business. Qualified Business Income applies to income taxes, not payroll taxes or AGI.
This may present an opportunity for the earning spouse. Take distributions, not salary for your monthly income, as salary is taxed at maximum rates, while distributions not taxed directly, but are taxed through the K-1 or Schedule C reported income. In California, we have Ostler/Smith based support. This support is generally described as a two part support obligation. The first is the monthly amount payable from recurring monthly income and the second part is calculated as a percentage of income in excess of the monthly amounts when received, such as bonus or distribution income.
There are limitations for the 20% deduction on pass through income. The Qualified Business Income deduction will be the lesser of 20% or the greater of 1) W-2 wages paid by the business x 50% or 2) W-2 wages paid by the business x 25% plus 2.5% of qualified property. Qualified Property is defined as property eligible for depreciation, used in the qualified business, not fully depreciated and acquired within the prior 10 years.
If the business is a service business, there may be no deduction permitted unless income limits are met. These business may deduct the 20% if taxable income is less than $315,000 for married or $157,500 for single. After these income limits are reached, a phase out begins. Once taxable income reaches $207,500 for single or $415,000 for a married taxpayer, there is no reduction remaining. Most service businesses are denied the Qualified Business Income deduction as stated except for engineers and architects.
If the qualified business pays the partner or shareholder a reasonable or guaranteed W-2 wage, the wage amount does not qualify for the Qualified Business Income reduction but will be fully taxed. However, for a sole proprietorship, partnership or LLC which pays no salary, the entire amount of income may qualify as Qualified Business Income. We note that the shareholder wage is included as wages for the 50%/25% Qualified Business Income deduction limitation.
SALT (State and Local Tax) limitation, higher income to tax .
As indicated taxpayers who live in California, New York and New Jersey as well as other states with high state income, property and local taxes, will be limited to $10,000 annual deduction on their federal income tax return, resulting in higher state income taxes as well as higher federal income taxes for many. While many taxpayers in these states will still benefit, due both to the limited deduction available or the doubling of the standard deduction, many homeowners will not benefit if they itemize due to their state income taxes and property tax levels. Losing the deductions for these expenses may not be offset by the reduced federal tax rates.
OTHER SCHEDULE A
- All miscellaneous deductions are eliminated.
- Medical expenses are AGI based and reduced to 7.5% for 2017 and 2018.
- Home interest is reduced for new purchases and home equity indebtedness interest is eliminated for all taxpayers.
- Property taxes and state income taxes are capped at $10,000.
All of these will not be relevant to the payee spouse whose sole source of income is non-taxable spousal support. Enterprising divorcing couples may work out an arrangement for a leaseback of the family residence, with the payor spouse continuing to own the family residence, increase the support payment to the payee, who then rents it from the payor spouse, who deducts the interest, property taxes, home insurance, depreciation, etc. and transfers it to the payee spouse when the children turn 18 or something similar.
162 (m) compensation limitationfor CEO, CFO, effect on reasonable comp, valuation issue.
The new law places a $1 million cap for the CEO of companies with either equity or debt in the public marketplace. The new rule expands coverage to include any person serving as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) during the tax year, as well as the three highest paid executive officers other than the CEO and CFO (commonly referred to as NEOs or “named executive officers”). If a “covered employee” is paid $1 million a year in base salary, that is all the company will be able to deduct and annual performance-based bonuses, stock options, performance-based equity and deferred compensation will no longer be deductible.
This relates to family law in the business valuation sector. We have already had one case wherein the reasonable compensation expert opined that the executives should be limited to $1 million as their reasonable compensation, reducing the business expenses, increasing the pre tax and after tax income and the resulting business value, when the increased income is capitalized.
In family law, the business valuation experts will normalize the income, adjusting the income and expenses for non recurring, non operating or unreasonable compensation (increasing or decreasing the expense) and capitalize the resulting income to determine the entity value.
Sub S vs. Sub C on valuation using after tax basis.
A long running dispute is how to value pass through entities as compared to taxable entities. Should a pass through entity be valued higher than a comparable taxable entity when the owners can elect to change the nature of the entity?
Should a family law court “require” (via the effect of its order on valuation) a Sub S to convert to a Sub C to obtain a lower tax, create more cash flow and a different business value? Majority consent is needed to revoke the S Election but unanimous consent is necessary to reelect S status. Distributions of shareholder’s basis and any accumulated adjustments account must be made within a year following the termination of the S Status. If the distribution is not made, the tax free nature of the distribution may be lost. Distributions may not be loaned back to the corporation and money must be distributed, not retained through the issuance of notes.
Valuation calculations will be impacted with the new tax rate for certain valuation methods, such as capitalized excess earnings or capitalized earnings.
The use of capitalized EBIDTA will not be impacted by the Qualified Business
Income reduction in taxable income.
The Qualified Business Income tax saving and resulting higher net income for pass through businesses restarts the argument about use of comparable sales for valuation. Since 80% of small businesses in America are pass through entities, should a C Corp acquisition (public company data) be permitted as a comparable sale for dissolution valuation purposes with the court’s implied finding that the business can change form to reduce taxes, increase income and thereby increase the calculated value? This would have a smoothing effect on the valuation, using public company data, which is generally available to compare to the subject company in a dissolution, while private company sales data is not generally available.
The question becomes should an S Corp, LLC, Partnership or Sole Proprietorship be valued higher than a C Corp due to the lower income tax and higher net income or should the personal income tax to the shareholders be used for valuation of the business (investment value to the owner) or should the business be valued as a C Corporation, making the businesses comparable in value (market value approach) but for the tax issue difference, which is controlled largely by the owners of the business?
Of course, there are other reasons not to use public company data, but this article is not designed to explore those issues, but to raise the questions which will have to be answered ultimately in a dissolution of marriage.
The above is not intended to be an all inclusive list of the ramifications of the effect of TCJA in divorce. It is merely a start of a discussion in what may prove to give meaning to the “doctrine of unintended consequences.” Stay tuned.
FOOTNOTES
1:Any agreement/orders for support which are in effect at December 31, 2018, are grandfathered and will remain grandfathered when modified unless the modification expressly provides the new law will be applicable.
2:Support paid will still be deductible from state taxable income and taxable to the state recipient in these states unless and until they conform their taxes to Federal Tax Law.
3:State and local taxes
4:Family support is a lump sum payment for all support purposes without breaking out the child support portion. However, if the support amount changes on the occurrence of a significant event connected with the children, the IRS may reallocate the child support payment as non deductible.
On June 19, 2018, Senator John Moorlach honored Hughes & Hughes, LLP, a family law firm in Tustin, as the 2018 California Small Business Association Honoree for Senate District 37. OCBA members Lisa Hughes, Bruce Hughes, David Wald, Stacey Stone, and Kathryn Yarnal were at the California Small Business DayTM 2018 held in Sacramento to accept the award. Read More Here
CONGRATULATIONS on being selected as the Small Business of the Year by Senator John Moorlach for the 2018 California Small Business Day™ in Sacramento on June 19th!! The event will be held at the Sacramento Convention Center, 1400 J Street. This is truly a momentous occasion thanks to the California Assembly passing a resolution in 2000 to honor small business! You will be one of approximately 75 small business owners honored out of 3.3 million in the State of California!
2017
November
Lisa and Bruce Hughes presented to the American Association of Attorney CPAs in Palm Desert on November 3, 2017 discussing what happens when professionals part.
Lisa and Bruce Hughes presented to the Desert Bar Association, Probate Section on November 9, 2017, discussing transmutations and the pitfalls which result.
September
In September of 2017, Mrs. Hughes was invited to speak as a panelist for the annual event of the Solo Practitioner and Small Firm section of The Orange County Bar Association regarding how to start, build and grow a Solo practice or Small law firm.
The panel consisted of Mrs. Hughes and three other prominent attorneys in Orange County. The event hosted an audience of the Orange County Bar Association leaders and members.
Mrs. Hughes spoke regarding finding a niche and deciding on why, when and how to start a law firm. She discussed how one should be passionate about the law that they choose to practice and how her background as a CPA and her desire to be a force for change led her to Family Law.
Mrs. Hughes addressed the importance of community involvement, philanthropic work and client relations to grow a successful firm. And last but not least, she emphasized the importance of not living in fear and taking a chance in committing to one's dream.
2016
June
Bruce and Lisa Hughes worked with Senator Moorlach for the past year (July 2015-July 2016) on Senate Bill 1255. This bill was important to the citizens of the State of California and ultimately became California Family Code Section 70. This new provision resolved an issue raised by the Supreme Court on the Date of Separation between divorcing parties. The Date of Separation is vitally important as it determines when the marriage ended. This date is used to determine the length of marriage for Spousal Support purposes; it is used to calculate the community share of various financial instruments such as bonuses, stock options and retirement accounts. We were very pleased to have initiated this effort and monitored and revised the bill throughout its progress in cooperation with Senator's staff.
2015
October
Forensic Accountants in Family Law Matters, by Bruce Hughes. Click to read more (PDF).
Cross Examination of an Expert, by Bruce Hughes. Click to read more (PDF).
Dig Deeper for True Value, by Bruce Hughes. Click to read more (PDF).
July
Lisa Hughes is featured as “Attorney of the Month” for Orange County Attorney Journal Magazine.
April
THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DISTINGUISHED COUNSEL
PRESS RELEASE
Lisa Hughes, of Hughes & Hughes LLP, has been selected to the 2015 list as a member of the Nation’s Top One Percent by the National Association of Distinguished Counsel. NADC is an organization dedicated to promoting the highest standards of legal excellence. Its mission is to objectively recognize the attorneys who elevate the standards of the Bar and provide a benchmark for other lawyers to emulate.
Members are thoroughly vetted by a research team, selected by a blue ribbon panel of attorneys with podium status from independently neutral organizations, and approved by a judicial review board as exhibiting virtue in the practice of law. Due to the incredible selectivity of the appointment process, only the top one percent of attorneys in the United States are awarded membership in NADC. This elite class of advocates consists of the finest leaders of the legal profession from across the nation.
March
On March 28th, 2015 in celebration of Women’s History Month, Lisa Hughes spoke to group of 30 women who attended Women Helping Women’s 2nd annual Smart & Sophisticated Day. Lisa was the keynote speaker during a day of empowerment to women. WHW is a non-profit organization which provides comprehensive employment support services for all disadvantaged men, women, and teens, empowering them to achieve economic self sufficiency through employment success.
January
David Wald, principal at our Orange County Law Firm, was recognized by Martindale-Hubbell as having the highest possible rating in both legal ability and ethical standards.
2014
Lisa Hughes, partner at our Orange County Family Law Firm, was appointed chair of Drug Use is Life Abuse.
Lisa Hughes was appointed chair of the Public Financing Advisory Committee
January
David Wald, principal at our Orange County Law Firm, was recognized by Martindale-Hubbell as having the highest possible rating in both legal ability and ethical standards.
2013
May
Bruce Hughes, partner at our Orange County Family Law Firm, published an article in Orange County Lawyer magazine in January of 2001regarding stock options and how they can be used as community property in a California divorce. Read more...
April
David E. Wald, a principal in the Tustin based family law firm, Hughes & Hughes, LLP, a passion for trial has sustained his long and illustrious career in family law. See David Wald featured on Laws.com in article, "Divorce Lawyer Makes Career of Lifelong Passion."
March
Bruce Hughes article on forensic accounting featured on California Lawyer website.
2012
Bruce Hughes was appointed to the Orange County Board of Supervisors Audit Oversight Committee.
Lisa Hughes joined the Orange County Sheriff’s Advisory Council, the American Association of Attorney-Certified Public Accountants, and the National Association of Certified Valuators and Analysts.
Lisa Hughes was one of 4 “roasters” of Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Sandra Hutchens at an event hosted by BIZPAC and the Orange County Business Council. Read the Thank You Letter and check out the photo gallery below:
Lisa Hughes was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Orange County Lincoln Club.
Bruce Hughes article in the California Lawyer: Forensic Accounting: Dig Deeper for True Value
2011
Lisa Hughes has been featured in the most recent edition of Southern California's Super Lawyers as one of the top attorneys in Southern California.
2010
August
Divorce Mediation Myths: Debunking Divorce Mediation Myth Click to read more(PDF).
Mediation FAQ's Click to read more(PDF).
Mediation Defined Click to read more(PDF).
July
Transmutation of the Characterization of Property, by Bruce Hughes. Click to read more (PDF).
2009
December
Bruce Hughes was published in the California State Bar Journal. December 2009. Click to read more (PDF).
May
Partner Lisa Hughes is profiled as a nominee in the Orange County Business Journal's Women in Business feature. May 2009. Click to read more (PDF).
April
Principal David E. Wald gives the Orange County Register his tips on how employees can help companies weather the recession. April 2009.
Click to read more (opens in new window).
February
David E. Wald is featured in the People column of Orange County Business Journal. February 2009. Click to read more (PDF).
Lisa Hughes contributed comments and insight about her experience with the foster care system in Orange County Parenting Magazine. February 2009.
Click to read more (PDF).
January
Lisa Hughes is interviewed about recent shifts in the condition of at-risk children in Orange County. Article appeared at OCRegister.com and in Canyon Life News. January 2009.
Click to read more (PDF).
David E. Wald is featured in the Movers & Shakers section of OCMetro.com. January 2009.
Click to read more (PDF).
David E. Wald joins Hughes & Sullivan Family Law Firm in Tustin as Principal, bringing with him 35 years of family law litigation experience. He will continue litigating in the courtroom as well as lead supervision and training of associates.
Click to read press release (PDF).
Article by Lisa Hughes in Orange County Lawyer about executive divorce. January 2009.
Click to read more (PDF).
2008
December
Lisa Hughes provided expert comments in Orange County Register regarding the trend of couples putting off divorce due to a down economy and bad housing market. December 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
Lisa Hughes provided expertise in the Kid Health column of OC Family regarding the impact of divorce on children. December 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
October
Lisa Hughes provided advice in BusinessWeek to small business owners regarding navigating through a divorce while ensuring the business does not suffer. October 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
Lisa Hughes’ tips for navigating a business during divorce, especially in a down economy, are featured in the Small Business Blog on OCRegister.com. October 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
Lisa Hughes is featured in Ask the Expert column in Orange County Parenting Magazine, responding to a question about creating a will for children. October 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
September
Hughes & Sullivan is featured in the Business Spotlight in Tustin News. August 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
July
Lisa Hughes is featured on KDOC-TV’s Daybreak OC in a story about the effect the down economy and housing market has on divorce. July 2008.
Click to view video in a new window.
Lisa Hughes’ expert comments are included in an article called “Divorce: Get Prepared” at WhatHappensNow.com about preparations to take before getting a divorce. July 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).
June
The Hughes & Sullivan law office interior is featured in a photo and article called “Welcome Home” in the OC Metro Business Magazine Workspace section, showcasing the comfortable, welcoming atmosphere of their offices. June 2008.
Click to read more (PDF).