USA – OKLAHOMA Law and Practice Contributed by: Danya Bundy, Aaron Bundy and Catherine Hensley, Bundy
there is a pending challenge to the exercise of juris ‑ diction. Factors considered for a stay request include the timeliness of the jurisdictional challenge togeth ‑ er with the facts pertaining to jurisdiction, including which state is the home state of the child in a child support case. Oklahoma courts may hear financial claims after a for ‑ eign divorce; however, Oklahoma does not have the ability to modify a spousal support order issued by a foreign court so long as the foreign court has continu ‑ ing, exclusive jurisdiction over the order under that jurisdiction’s laws. Oklahoma may modify foreign child support orders in certain circumstances in accord ‑ ance with the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act. 2.2 Service and Process in Financial Proceedings Service in financial proceedings must be made in the same manner as other civil lawsuits: a petition and summons must be served by certified mail (with return receipt requested and delivery restricted to the addressee), by commercial courier, by a sheriff, or by personal service using a licensed process server. There is no statutory timeframe or waiting period for a financial proceeding, so each case must be pros ‑ ecuted and defended like any civil lawsuit. 2.3 Division of Assets In a divorce or annulment proceeding, the court has a statutory duty to determine what is each party’s sepa ‑ rate, non-marital property and to make a just and rea ‑ sonable division of all property acquired by the parties jointly during the marriage. The “just and reasonable” standard is also characterised as fair and equitable, and it does not necessarily mean an equal, 50/50 divi ‑ sion. The sole exception to the just and reasonable standard is where there is a valid prenuptial agreement that provides for an alternative method of division of jointly acquired property. Appellate case law says that trial courts should also divide any enhancement in value of otherwise sepa ‑ rate property if the value increase was the result of efforts, funds or skills of either spouse during the mar ‑ riage. Spousal contributions are distinguished from economic factors or market forces unrelated to efforts of labour. The burden of proof is on the non-owning
spouse claiming a share of an in-marriage increase in separate property value to show the value of the prop ‑ erty at the time of the marriage, the value at the time of trial, and that the enhancement was the result of effort by either spouse as opposed to economic conditions or circumstances beyond the parties’ control. Courts have broad discretion to divide and allocate marital assets and funds. Property may be divided in kind or require payments necessary to effect a fair division. Even when property has been determined to be one spouse’s separate, non-marital property, the court may invade that separate property for alimony or child support payments. Under Oklahoma law, pets are classified as personal property, meaning courts apply standard property division principles to deter ‑ mine ownership. While there are some disclosure obligations early in a divorce or annulment case, the disclosure require ‑ ments generally pertain to income and debt. Each spouse is entitled to engage in the full range of discov ‑ ery permitted by the rules of civil procedure, including written discovery requests to the other party, depo ‑ sitions of witnesses, and subpoenas. The court can enforce discovery requests and subpoenas, but it will rarely involve itself in the discovery process in the absence of a request by one of the parties. Divorce courts recognise the concept of trusts. Okla ‑ homa statutes provide that provisions in favour of a spouse in an express trust are revoked in the event of a divorce. 2.4 Spousal Maintenance Courts have broad authority to award spousal sup ‑ port (alimony) in divorce proceedings. Oklahoma does not have a fixed mathematical formula for calculating spousal support. Broadly, alimony may be awarded on a temporary or final basis when one spouse dem ‑ onstrates both a financial need for support and that the other spouse has the ability to pay the needed support. Spousal support claims are highly fact-sen ‑ sitive. Appellate courts have recognised the following factors: • demonstrated need during the post-matrimonial economic readjustment period;
359 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook