lenihan (1)

Case Study Details

We always bring client satisfaction no matter what the case
Divorce on Ground of Irretrievable

Divorce on Ground of Irretrievable

Case Details

Client: Jack Travol
Attorney: James Lenihan
Case Start: 24 / 04 / 2021
Execution Time: 5 Months
Result: Winner
Other: Your Custom

Years Of Experience

Many Prestigious Awards

Experienced Attorney

Free Consulting

Let's win together

Please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you with 1-2 business days. Or just call us now.

Summary Of The Case Studies

In this case study, we explore a divorce case filed on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, a common issue that law firms encounter in family law practice. The couple in question, John and Sarah (pseudonyms), had been married for 10 years and had reached a point in their relationship where reconciliation seemed impossible. This case delves into the challenges faced, the approach taken, and the positive outcome achieved through legal intervention.

The Problems Being Encountered of the Case

The primary issue faced in this case was the irretrievable breakdown of the marital relationship. Both parties had reached a stage where they could no longer communicate effectively, trust had eroded, and attempts at reconciliation had failed. They were locked in a cycle of conflict and emotional distress, which adversely affected their children and overall well-being.

Additional challenges included:

  1. Child Custody Disputes: John and Sarah had two young children, and deciding on custody arrangements became a contentious issue.
  2. Property Division: The couple owned joint assets, including a house and savings, which needed to be equitably divided.
  3. Spousal Support: Sarah sought financial support from John due to disparities in their income levels.

Our Approach And Solution

To address the complex issues in this case, our law firm adopted a strategic approach:

  1. Mediation and Counseling: Initially, we recommended mediation and counseling to explore the possibility of reconciliation and amicable resolution. While these efforts were unsuccessful, they demonstrated our commitment to preserving the family unit when possible.
  2. Child-Centered Approach: In determining child custody arrangements, our firm prioritized the best interests of the children. We worked closely with both parents to develop a parenting plan that allowed for shared responsibilities and meaningful involvement.
  3. Equitable Property Division: We conducted a thorough assessment of the couple’s assets and liabilities and negotiated a fair settlement that both parties found acceptable.
  4. Alimony Agreement: To address Sarah’s financial concerns, we negotiated a spousal support agreement that ensured her financial stability while considering John’s ability to pay.

Attorney In This Case:

James Lenihan

Owner, Lenihan & Associates, LLC

Why choose This law firm: A boutique firm specializing in litigation. Whether your issues are in State or Federal Court or whether they are either civil or criminal matters, this firm gives you the individual attention you want and deserve. We don’t handle cases . . .we represent people!

The Outcome of the Lawsuit

Through careful negotiation and legal expertise, this case achieved a positive outcome:

  • Divorce Granted: The court granted the divorce on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown, allowing John and Sarah to move forward with their lives separately.
  • Amicable Child Custody Arrangement: Both parties agreed to a shared custody arrangement that provided a stable and nurturing environment for their children.
  • Equitable Property Division: John and Sarah were satisfied with the division of their assets, ensuring a fair distribution of wealth.
  • Spousal Support Agreement: Sarah received the financial support she needed while John’s financial obligations remained manageable.

Ultimately, this case serves as a testament to our law firm’s commitment to resolving complex family law matters with sensitivity and fairness, prioritizing the well-being of all parties involved.

Case Image

Customer Reviews in this Case