On Your Case: A Comprehensive, Compassionate (and Only Slightly Bossy) Legal Guide for Every Stage of a Woman's Life

By Lisa Green

Television legal analyst and attorney Lisa Green offers something new: a witty, direct and empowering legal guide for women, filled with accessible information they can employ to understand and respond to common legal issues throughout their lives, from dating, marriage, and kids to jobs, retirement, aging parents, and wills.

Lisa Green has an urgent message for women of all ages, especially those who consider themselves fully briefed on nutrition, personal finance, good schools, and great bargains:

What about the law?

Whether or not you invite it into your life, the law will find you. When it does, will you be ready to respond?

In On Your Case, Lisa fills a long-standing gap in women's bookshelves with a thorough, compelling and occasionally hilarious guide to the range of legal issues women can expect to confront throughout their busy lives. Leveraging her professional training as a lawyer and her personal experience as a wife, ex-wife, mother, and daughter, Lisa explains common, even complicated, legal issues in practical, easy to understand terms. Sharing true stories, from jaw-dropping court cases to her own personal challenges, Lisa explains how readers can make the best possible decisions when problems arise. And legal problems will arise, Lisa counsels, so women need to get smart, and get ready.

In her warm, yet firm, voice, Lisa guides readers through the potential legal issues around:

• Relationships: Online dating, pre and postnuptial agreements, engagement and marriage
• Separation and Divorce: Splitting without anxiety, child custody and support, pet custody disputes
• Babies, Children and Teens: Pregnancy and adoption, advocating for a special needs child, misbehaving teens
• Work: Employment and household help
• Domestic violence
• Social media
• Midlife and elder care: Wills, medical decisions and power of attorney
• Legal Help: Hiring a lawyer, DIY

As Suze Orman demystified personal finance and put women in the driver's seat of their own financial future, Lisa Green now does for the law. With On Your Case, Lisa empowers you by equipping you with the tools you need to take care of yourself, your assets, your family, and your career.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Open Road Integrated Media
• Release date: Feb 17, 2015
• ISBN: 9780062308030

Lisa Green

Lisa Green is a lawyer and legal analyst. After earning her law degree at New York University, she was a litigator in private practice before joining NBC News, first as a lawyer and then as a senior producer for Weekend Today and as an NBC News legal analyst. Lisa continues to make on-air appearances for NBC News and MSNBC, and she has written and blogged about legal issues for msnbc.com and published articles in Barron's, the National Law Journal, and the Wall Street Journal. Lisa lives in New York City, where she serves as communications director for a major New York law firm. She is the mother of two young adults.

Book preview

DEDICATION

For Claire and Andrew

CONTENTS

Dedication

The Caveat Page

Introduction: Your Friend at the Bar

PART ONE: RELATIONSHIPS AND THE LAW

1. Launching a Relationship: When Is Online Over the Line?

2. Cohabitation: Does Practice Make Perfect?

3. Marriage Basics

4. Common-Law Marriage

5. Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships

6. Prenuptial (and Postnuptial) Agreements

7. Four-Prong Problems: Who Keeps the Engagement Ring?

PART TWO: SEPARATION AND DIVORCE

8. Separation Without Anxiety

9. All About Annulment

10. Divorce: Getting Started

11. Divorce: Property and Support

12. Child Custody

13. Child Support

14. Fighting Over Fido: The Pain of Pet Custody Disputes

15. DIY, Mediation, and Collaborative Divorce

PART THREE: BABIES, CHILDREN, AND TEENS

16. Making Babies

17. Adoption

18. School Support

19. Advocating for a Special Needs Child

20. Your Misbehaving Teens

21. Campus Safety

PART FOUR: EMPLOYMENT ISSUES

22. On the Job

23. Household Help

PART FIVE: PROTECTING YOURSELF

24. Online Essentials

25. Domestic Violence

PART SIX: LATER LIFE ISSUES

26. Taking Charge I: Medical Decisions and Powers of Attorney

27. Taking Charge II: Estate Planning

28. Managing Mom, Dad, and Other Older Loved Ones

PART SEVEN: FINDING LEGAL HELP

29. Hiring a Lawyer, or Doing It Yourself

Afterword

Notes

Bibliography

Acknowledgments

Index

Credits

Copyright

About the Publisher

THE CAVEAT PAGE

Void where prohibited. Your mileage may vary. Professional driver on closed course.

Lawyers love conditions. So here are some, from me to you.

I am a lawyer, but I am not your lawyer.

After all, even if I could be your lawyer, you’d still need a lawyer.

Why? Let’s start with where you live. The answers to so many legal questions that matter to us, including those related to marriage, divorce, and estate planning, are going to depend on very specific, and sometimes puzzlingly quirky, state laws. Before you talk to a local lawyer, read the relevant chapter of this book, then consult the resource section for more specific information; armed with that knowledge, your meeting will be more cost-efficient and productive.

Even if you read this book and then decide to engage in some do-it-yourself legal work, you’ll probably want a lawyer to review your handiwork. Laws are seldom imprecise, so even an innocent mistake on a prenup or will could render the entire document useless. Fixing that mistake could cost you multiples of any lawyer’s fee.

What’s more, while law may seem set in stone, that stone is time-soluble. In other words, laws change in response to societal and political shifts, and that means no book about legal advice can be permanently up to date. A perfect example of a time-sensitive legal issue is our nation’s dramatic embrace of same-sex marriage, with related state and federal law shifting as I type. (For updates on this and other fast-developing legal issues, I invite you to visit my companion website, lisagreenlaw.com.)

For all those reasons, think of this book not as legal advice, but as a start—I would say, the head start—to identifying and coping with legal issues that come your way.

Before we proceed, one more note. This book features a lot of disputes. In some instances the combatants’ names have been changed; their cases were never well publicized and there’s no need to start now. In all instances, the stories are true.

INTRODUCTION: YOUR FRIEND AT THE BAR

I know we’ve just met, but I recognize you. Like me, you are an expert.

Please, no need to feign humility on my account. You’re at home, half watching that awards show and second-guessing that starlet. Her gown: what was she thinking? She’s too thin, the width of a pipe cleaner. Or maybe a paper clip. Who told her pixie cuts look good?

You’re at the coffee shop. I see you there every weekday, holding court with the moms in the back, pontificating (and not quietly) about the president’s budget speech, the mayor’s education decision, that appalling reality show catfight you all admit you watched, squealing with the collective pleasure of indulging in cable instead of reading or paying attention to your husbands. Or you are ahead of me in the supermarket checkout line, extolling the superiority of that particular brand of yogurt.

Admit it. You hold unimpeachable opinions about just about everything: hemlines, tutors, men. So what if you aren’t an expert? Who needs to be formally trained to be right? You know how to read advice books and websites, and you know how to pick up the phone and ask for help. Your friends insist on your two cents before they act, and they consider calling you before dialing 911 in an emergency. Even your kids occasionally admit you have a point. That’s why for almost any matter—what to wear, what to see, whom to hire—you usually sit pretty. When you have a problem, you just consult yourself (with the occasional call to treasured gal pals, Mom for big-ticket items, or your cousin the psychologist in case a decision could hurt a family member’s feelings, heaven forbid) and then steer the big ship of needy friends and relatives to the correct result.

But I bet there’s a big exception to your expertise.

It’s the law.

Women and the law have long had a rocky relationship. Sure, today women are Supreme Court justices, partners at prestigious law firms, chairwomen of major law enforcement agencies. Then again, a woman wasn’t named partner at a United States law firm until 1937, when the intriguingly named Soia Mentschikoff got the nod at the intimidatingly titled Spence, Hotchkiss, Parker & Duryee. Not a single woman graduated from Harvard Law School until 1953. Recent strides aside, we are still catching up professionally from a very late start.

While you may be only vaguely aware of the status of women in the legal profession, I guarantee you are an avid consumer of law stories. Who can resist that idle flip through an afternoon’s cable offerings until you hear the familiar da-dum and settle into the guilty pleasure of some Law & Order reruns? Did you watch any coverage of the lurid Casey Anthony murder trial? Read a legal thriller? Thought so.

So here’s what I don’t understand: if some of us are advancing professionally as lawyers, and all of us are enthralled by the law, why are women reliably dumbfounded when they have a legal problem?

It pains me to bring it up, but it’s true: legal problems are as predictable as bad weather, and somehow, though we are otherwise often immaculately attired, we never carry appropriate umbrellas.

Consider three dire emergencies I heard about in a recent two-week stretch. Each happened to a friend of mine who told me her story, unsolicited.

1.   A registered nurse and mother of two wonderful children, happily married and enjoying an idyllic, outdoorsy life, learns that her husband has spent sixteen of their twenty-three married years in a secret relationship with another woman.

2.   Another mom, a successful film industry professional, encourages her son (enrolled in a leading liberal arts college) to go outside and take some fresh air, advice he understands to mean walk outdoors, and bring a joint. The New York City police come calling soon after.

3.   Still another successful working mother with affluent parents who live, independently and well, in another state discovers they have lost a substantial chunk of their savings to a fraudulent financial adviser. He gained her parents’ trust after he was able to impress them with his knowledge of family information he had gleaned from a rudimentary Google search.

Smart women? Yes. Generally clued in to the best approach to professional and personal problems? Absolutely. Clueless about how to respond to these life-altering problems? Utterly.

Have these types of unnerving emergencies happened to you? There are only two possible answers: no, and not yet.

If you are still skeptical, let’s try this pop quiz. It’s pass-fail, and just between us, so be honest.

Question 1: If you are married, are you maintaining separate credit accounts, and do you understand that you are fully liable for debt your spouse rings up in any joint accounts, even if you eventually were to divorce?

Question 2: If you have children, have you designated a guardian in case something happens to you?

Question 3: Whether or not you have children, or even a spouse or partner, have you signed an advance medical directive and identified someone you trust to look after your finances in case you take ill?

If you answered no to any of these questions, welcome to one of America’s largest, unheralded demographics: women who think laws related to child care, money, illness, and death somehow don’t apply to them.

I’m going to try not to raise my voice, but there’s something I want you to understand: You don’t get to decide when your luck will run out or your fortunes take a turn for the worse. Nor do you get a vote about whether your contractor will abandon your job, whether your boss will hit on you, or whether your doctor will commit malpractice.

Ladies, it’s time we acknowledge an essential truth of modern life. Whether or not you invite it into your life, the law will find you. When it does, will you be ready to respond? If you are prepared, you have increased your odds that you can properly answer these predictable questions: Should you sign that prenup? Remarry? Read the incomprehensible lease for your son’s first apartment before you cosign?

I wrote this book so you can understand the legal issues that will fall inevitably (and just like our jawlines) into the most carefully protected lives.

I’m a lawyer who worked at a leading New York firm for several years and helped clients with a wide range of problems, from children who needed to be legally emancipated from their harmful parent so they could be adopted by a loving foster family to major media companies who wanted to assert their intellectual property rights in the digital age. In addition to having personal experience with legal issues, ranging from my own divorce to dilemmas about real estate and employment contracts, I also explain them on television, which means I can separate fact from speculation and direct your attention to the key issues you really need to know. Think of me as your aide de camp: the relative with a law degree that your family failed to produce. In short, let me help you.

Together, we’ll look at the legal issues that arise in each phase of a woman’s life, from that first serious move-in relationship to the workplace, babies, kids, teens, spouses, exes, aging parents, and (sorry, but it’s inevitable) aging you.

On Your Case is organized chronologically, to make it as easy as possible to find the guidance you need at your current stage of life, to read ahead and plan for future issues, or to look back to give the best possible advice to family and friends.

Stick with me, and together we’ll face tough situations and improve your odds for success. I cannot repair a leak, identify a zone defense, or self-administer a manicure, but thanks to my training and research, I can stand my ground when I see a dense contract or hear yet another tale of legal woe.

By the time we’re done, you’ll wonder why you forgot to think about the legal implications that pop up in matters of love, work, and family. Then you’ll stop worrying and perform the act that reliably banishes worry. No, not binge-watching reruns. Taking informed action.

So: Confidence up. Posture straight. Spanx on. Let’s go.

PART ONE

RELATIONSHIPS AND THE LAW

1

LAUNCHING A RELATIONSHIP: WHEN IS ONLINE OVER THE LINE?

OPENING STATEMENT

Jeanne McCarthy, a writer and devoted volunteer for Habitat for Humanity, wanted companionship, and needed help finding it. She hired the Two of Us dating service, paying $7,000 for help finding a man, age fifty-eight to sixty-seven, with an active lifestyle like hers.

Unfortunately, we can glean details of Jeanne’s dating service experience not from a triumphant wedding announcement, but from court papers. Her lawyer recounted Jeanne’s situation in order to sue Two of Us, claiming that in five months, the aptly named site offered Jeanne just two introductions. Only one of the two yielded a date: a man with an outstanding criminal warrant. A spokesman for the agency said the incident was isolated, and that the company guaranteed introductions, not dates.

Do lawsuits bring relief when a dating experience goes south? More on that in a moment. First, though, let’s take a brief look at current dating trends in the Internet age.

Alarming dispatches from the usual sources suggest that the way we date now has changed, and not for the better. To illustrate this tired Style section trope, let’s check in with a reliable source for trends that induce hand-wringing: National Public Radio.

For a feature on How Young People Date Today, NPR conducted an earnest interview with an entrepreneur who insisted that the word date was passé, and that the better term for a social get-together would be grouper. Conveniently, that was also the name of his online dating website, which encouraged daters, I mean groupers, to assemble an entourage, go out together, and, inevitably, post self-referential photos of the evening.

Why ditch dating for grouping? The Grouper CEO observed that young people in the hashtag generation need a new approach to dating in part because they can’t tolerate the possibility of date failure. As he told NPR: For a generation of people who grew up with participation trophies, rejection is a hard thing.

I don’t doubt that today’s daters have fragile egos. That would surely explain why my own young adult children refuse to disclose even rudimentary information about their romantic partners to me.

But the notion that the essential emotion that dating invokes—profound insecurity—has changed over time because of evolving gender roles, smartphones, or start-ups is nonsensical. Dating is and will always be an awkward activity fraught with anxiety and rejection-infused dread.

And it remains that way throughout life.

My experience with Dating: The AARP Years may be representative. In middle age, I carried the same fear of rejection, plus the added disappointment of meeting suitors who, like me, were falling apart and often burdened with either actual excess weight and/or the weight of unfulfilling jobs, irksome ex-spouses, and hapless children. In midlife, daters suffer the same neuroses and dashed hopes of our younger counterparts, but with a twist: absolutely everyone looks younger in their profile photo than in person, and at our age, that’s not a positive thing.

In short, dating hasn’t really changed. It’s a rehearsal for a more serious relationship, so it tends toward the tentative, hope-dashing, and usually terrible.

Since dating can lead to disappointment, and disappointment equals suffering, and pain and suffering is a category for which people often seek legal recourse . . . well, you can see where this is going.

Not that I mean to encourage anyone unlucky in love to sue: the opportunities for compensation are limited. After all, have you ever heard of a firm specializing in matchmaking law? Nonetheless, unhappy suitors have tried to recoup their investment, and sometimes even damages, when their dates have gone awry, looking to persuade a court that they were promised happiness but got something else entirely. That’s when both sides of the dispute take a closer look at the contract to see what, if anything, the brokenhearted plaintiff can claim.

IT’S THE LAW

To understand how much you can legally depend on a matchmaker or dating site to introduce you to the attractive, successful, and nonhomicidal partner of your dreams, let’s look at that enemy of romance: fine print, specifically the fine print for OkCupid.com.

OkCupid has a perky, user-friendly, and altogether upbeat-looking website. How upbeat? The service is run by a company called Humor Rainbow Inc. When it comes to the lawyerly fine print, however, its terms and conditions are humor-free. Want a sense of how relaxed OkCupid wants you to feel about embarking on your online dating adventures? Consider this caveat. The capital letters are theirs.

HUMOR RAINBOW STRONGLY ADVISES YOU TO USE EXTREME CAUTION BEFORE SHARING PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION WITH OTHER USERS ON ITS WEBSITE. HUMOR RAINBOW DOES NOT CONDUCT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS ON ITS USERS.

You may be thinking: Dating is tough enough. The last thing I need is discouraging boilerplate from the people who are suggesting that they can help me meet my match. But I applaud OkCupid for its candor. These sites are clearinghouses, not old-fashioned matchmakers or your friend with the (usually misguided) hunch that you would adore her husband’s law partner, the one whose wife dumped him on the grounds of first-degree marital boredom.

At the heart of this legal language lies a practical bit of advice: it’s important to be realistic about people you meet online.

Consider the case of New York lawyer John Friedland, who claimed the matchmaking firm Amy Laurent International promised the ultimate experience in high-end dating but delivered a sub-ultimate experience to him. According to Friedland, Laurent failed to live up to her vow to pair him with three appropriate dates each month and then refused to refund his fee. The case was settled out of court.

Friedland is hardly alone, at least in the legal sense. Joan Cooke of Florida sued the matchmaking company Kelleher & Associates after it paired her with men she found unsuitable (including a Republican; Joan’s a Democrat). The service called the lawsuit baseless and it was ultimately dismissed.

Match.com spent four years fighting a proposed class-action lawsuit brought by clients who claimed that the site left millions of expired profiles online and served up fake ones, too. Those lawsuits in California, New York, and Texas federal courts all failed, with Match reminding the courts that its terms of use protect the site from liability.

These stories get nationwide, sometimes worldwide attention, and the prospect of that publicity surely helps reduce the number of claims. After all, while the suing suitor can reach an out-of-court settlement that presumably includes some cash, she first has to endure tabloid scorn as a hapless loser, or victim, in love.

Sometimes, though, an online date ends so horribly you might think compensation would be in order. But is it?

EXHIBIT 1: WORST-CASE SCENARIO

Mary Kay Beckman had a catastrophic dating problem. The Nevada woman met Wade Ridley on Match.com in 2010. After a handful of dates, she decided to break it off. Surely Mary Kay imagined that Wade would go quietly. Instead, Ridley hid in Mary Kay’s garage with a knife and surprised her, stabbing her ten times until the knife broke, then stomping on her head. Incredibly, Mary Kay survived, though she required multiple surgeries. Ridley was later arrested for murdering another woman; he committed suicide in prison before he could be tried.

Mary Kay sued Match.com for negligence, deceptive trade, failure to warn, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Match reportedly responded that while what happened to Mary Kay was awful, the lawsuit was absurd—the site could not be held responsible for the behavior of its members and the behavior of one individual with no prior criminal record did not reflect the community of Match.com users. There’s no public report of the outcome of the lawsuit, but chances are that Match.com’s lawyers had the better argument: that users, including Mary Kay, agreed to terms of use that protected Match from liability.

Is this story representative of the typical online dating experience? Of course not. But it’s a cautionary tale of what can go wrong when you meet a stranger online for a date, something Match.com says 40 million Americans have tried. Connectivity has revolutionized the way singles meet, but it’s also introduced a fresh new crop of potential dangers.

Leaving liability aside, how can we protect ourselves when we head out of the safety of our homes and into the company of someone we may know only from photographs or a voice on the phone?

In 2012, Match.com (along with two other prominent dating sites) pledged to check their users against online sex offender registries, but a Match executive acknowledged that daters need to exercise common sense and prudence when meeting someone new.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Plenty of websites, including Match and its competitors, as well as organizations like AARP, offer thoughtful guidance about safe dating so you can meet new friends and make sure you get home in one piece.

I like the following advice from an unexpected but logical source: a university filled with young people who are wading into the dating pool, largely unsupervised. These tips, aimed at female students but useful for women of any age, are excerpted from a helpful list published by Johns Hopkins University:

♦   Always tell someone where you are going with your date and when you are expected to return.

♦   Check out a first date or a blind date with friends. Meet in and go to public places. Carry money for a taxi or take your own car in case you need to cut the date short.

♦   Pay attention to what your date says about himself or herself. If you detect discrepancies, this should raise a flag.

♦   Trust your instincts. If a place or the way your date acts makes you nervous or uneasy, get away from the situation.

♦   When out with friends, keep together and try not to get separated. Do not leave a social event with someone you have just met or do not know well.

♦   Be careful not to let alcohol or other drugs decrease your ability to take care of yourself and make sensible decisions.

♦   Do not accept beverages from someone you do not know or trust. Always watch your drink and never leave it unattended.

Beyond that, if you are looking for dating advice, I suggest you look for another book. My dating experiences have all fit in the narrow range between the awkward and the appalling, and through it all I seem to have learned nothing other than the veracity of the frog-to-prince ratio.

2

COHABITATION: DOES PRACTICE MAKE PERFECT?

OPENING STATEMENT

Objection.

I’m a lawyer, not a linguist, but I have a problem with the word cohabitation on the ground that it is just . . . cold. Couldn’t we substitute a more appealing term for a couple who live together, often happily and unencumbered by societal constraints or a contract?

To my ear, cohabitation sounds faintly zoological, or like the situation forced upon a group of meek, captured scientists by a malevolent genius who has imprisoned them in a windowless tower until they invent the death-dealing superweapon of his dreams. The B-movie dialogue nearly writes itself: That’s right, you will all cohabitate, without hot meals or premium cable, until you develop the device that will let me rule . . . the . . . world . . . mwah-ha-ha. . . .

Semantics aside, for many couples the decision to cohabitate is a welcome compromise, and, of course, often serves as a practice round for marriage. More couples are choosing to cohabitate, and they are remaining together as unmarried couples for longer periods of time. According to the 2006 to 2010 National Survey of Family Growth, almost half of the women surveyed cohabited, rather than married, as their first union with a partner. The duration of those relationships rose to twenty-two months from thirteen months in 1995. And couples are not rushing to marry once they have children; the survey found 23 percent of births to women ages 15 to 44 occurring while the women were living with (rather than married to) their mate, up from 14 percent in 2003.

But while these relationships may be longer lasting, they hardly guarantee a stable, lifelong partnership. The survey reported that one-half of these first cohabitations from 1997 to 2001 led to marriage, but one-third ended within five years. Is that a big deal? Yes, if property and, more significant, kids are involved.

Enter the law. Can it stabilize these popular, sometimes fragile relationships? More specifically, should you consider a cohabitation agreement?

IT’S THE LAW

It’s decidedly unromantic. And you may think the very reason to cohabitate, rather than marry, is to avoid the burdensome responsibilities that a marriage imposes. But before you scoff, ask yourself: Will you be sharing rent or the cost of maintaining a home? Buying a pet together? Is anyone pregnant? Have either of you socked away savings?

As you live together, if things go well, you will start to accumulate assets and debts, and maybe dependents. You will have a relationship that resembles a marriage but lacks its protections if you split up. Is this the most sensible way to proceed? Or would it make sense to plan for a worst-case scenario before it might arise?

A cohabitation agreement needn’t be complicated, and if it makes things easier, we can give it the adorable nickname that appeared in a British newspaper: a no nup.

If you live in a state that recognizes cohabitation agreements, and almost all do, what can your no nup include? The American Bar Association offers these prospective deal points:

♦   Expenses. From rent or mortgage to the weekly grocery bill, you can agree in writing to divide the bills, or assign percentages for who pays what.

♦   Debts. You can confirm that you will not be responsible for the other’s separate debts and can decide how you will share responsibility for jointly held debt (though keep in mind that to your creditor, you are both responsible for joint debt).

♦   Assets. You can agree that neither one of you has the right to assets the other holds, whether it’s real estate, pensions or retirement accounts, or a business one partner is building. You can agree that if one partner helps pay a home mortgage, that partner can have the right to share in any increase in the home’s value if you split. If you buy assets together, you can agree on how they would be divided.

♦   Support. Is one partner supporting the other? We’ll take a closer look at palimony below, but a cohabitation agreement is the right place to decide whether to offer support or waive any rights to collect.

♦   Estate planning. You can agree not to try to claim any share of an estate if your partner dies and that is your mutual plan. Of course, if you are taking my advice, you will make your beneficiaries clear in a will or trust; still, it never hurts to reiterate your posthumous intentions.

♦   Children. Cohabitation (and other) agreements have limited power to determine parenting issues, such as custody and child support. Why? Because courts take a strong interest in protecting children’s rights, so they are loath to let couples make private decisions that might harm kids. In other words, while it’s prudent to include your shared thoughts about the care of your kids if you split up, a judge will retain the right (if prodded by an unhappy parent) to supersede the agreement with a ruling she thinks is better for the children.

Another consideration for unmarried couples: paternity. When a married couple has a baby, the husband is presumed to be the father. This presumption doesn’t exist for unmarried partners, so consider having the father sign a statement acknowledging paternity.

Even if you are squeamish about an agreement, consider whether you should at least identify your partner as your health care proxy. If you aren’t married, and you take ill, you want to be sure your partner has the necessary permission to visit you, and the right to make decisions about your care. Separately, you may want to grant your partner power of attorney to manage your finances. (You can read much more about these documents in chapter 26.)

If you decide to sign a cohabitation agreement, even one you draft yourself using an online form as a starting point, I recommend you review it with a lawyer familiar with your state’s law so you know whether it’s enforceable in court. Make that two lawyers. Each partner should be represented separately; even if you like your partner’s lawyer, you need your own. For one thing, you want to be sure the agreement is fair to both partners. Also, the two-lawyer review protects each partner should the other complain she was strong-armed into signing something she didn’t understand. This comes up a lot in prenups, as we’ll see later.

EXHIBIT 2: THE PATHBREAKING PALIMONY CASE

Are you pleasantly surprised that you can