Spouses Who Take the Money and Run
Jane's Law would help New Yorkers go after their stolen assetsBy Meagan Francis | Reviewed by Canaan Suitt, J.D. | Last updated on May 2, 2023
Use these links to jump to different sections:
When Jane Maharam’s ex-husband, Robert Maharam, left the state with the married couple’s assets—including $4 million the court had ordered him in 1983 to pay Jane—she had few options, under current law.
“You could sue in a New York court, but [the other spouse] doesn’t have to show up,” says Michael Stutman of Mayerson Stutman, a fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers and author of How to Divorce in New York.
“He says, “”The most that could happen is that a warrant for their arrest would be issued in New York,” he says. But that warrant could only be used if the ex-spouse returned to New York, meaning they could still roam free in the other 49 states.
Forcing the Nonpaying Spouse into Court
Legislation proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2019 would have strengthened enforcement of court-ordered spousal property distribution. Called “Jane’s Law” in honor of Jane Maharam, the legislation would have made it a federal crime for ex-spouses to evade paying spousal support by fleeing the state.
Under current law, ex-spouses who refuse to pay their court-ordered obligations can face fines, restitution, and jail time, but only in the state where the court gives the order. With Jane’s Law, those charges would apply in any state in which the ex-spouse lives. This would enable law enforcement to track down those who avoid paying spousal maintenance by leaving the state.
Forcing the nonpayer into court is important, according to Stutman, because the threat of jail time is an effective enforcement mechanism: “When the handcuffs come out, you’d be amazed how fast the checkbooks follow.”
An interstate enforcement system could have some potential pitfalls, he adds. “It’s not easy to get two different courts, states and counties to coordinate.” And today, because spousal maintenance is considered a rehabilitative measure meant to last only long enough for the collecting spouse to get back into the job market, the collecting spouse may still be in a rough spot: He or she will have to front the money for legal fees, and without a guarantee, the risk might not seem worth taking.
Still, anything would be better than the current system, Stutman says. “The easier it is for the recipient to latch onto the defaulting payer, the less expensive it is,” he says. With a better system for tracking down deadbeat ex-spouses who’ve fled the state, he says, “You’d end up with more money going to where it was supposed to end up in the first place.” As of right now, Jane’s Law has not been enacted, though it has been proposed multiple times in the past. It may get a renewed push in the future.
Getting Legal Help
If you have questions about marital property, financial responsibility, alimony, or other matters related to divorce and family law, speak with an experienced family law or divorce lawyer.
For more information on this area of law, see our overviews of family law, divorce, and mediation and collaborative law.
What do I do next?Enter your location below to get connected with a qualified attorney today.
Additional Family Law articles
- How a Domestic Partnership Compares to a Marriage, Legally Speaking
- A Parental Rights Primer for New York
- Legal Options to Stop Exes from Stalking or Harassment
- Is Mediation Mandatory in New York?
- What Makes a Successful Mediation?
- Resolving Conflicts Out of the Courtroom
- How Cohabitation Agreements Work in New York
Attorney directory searches
Find top lawyers with confidence
The Super Lawyers patented selection process is peer influenced and research driven, selecting the top 5% of attorneys to the Super Lawyers lists each year. We know lawyers and make it easy to connect with them.Find a lawyer near you