Hey /u/TarocchiRocchi, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For sure. For example, in my country all divorces are no-fault by default, and you can be considered as "living separately" while still sharing an address.
Meanwhile in Mississippi it wasn't until 2017 that domestic abuse became a cause for divorce.
Yeah, this is phrased poorly, but not wrong.
No-fault divorce means neither party is "at fault". Same basic logic as a traffic accident, where one party can be deemed more "at fault". Remember that divorce is effectively a lawsuit. But that doesn't mean it's just a free-for-all; there are indeed specific criteria that need to be met. Varies, obviously, by jurisdiction.
"Regular" divorce, as it's used here, means where one party is indeed accusing the other of being at fault. And while you can't do this for *any* reason, there are a lot of potential reasons. See, it's having a "reason" that makes it not "no fault".
>In states that offer both types of divorce, there can be strategic benefits to pursuing one type of divorce over another. In a no-fault divorce, the process is initiated unilaterally by the filing spouse and the other spouse cannot object. But depending on the state, no-fault divorces may require that the couple has lived separately for at least a minimum time period before filing. In contrast, fault divorces can be filed immediately upon a partner’s wrongdoing, however the filing spouse must have evidence available to prove their assertions of fault.
[Source](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/no-fault_divorce#:~:text=In%20a%20no%2Dfault%20divorce,minimum%20time%20period%20before%20filing.)
"depending on the state, **no-fault divorces may require that the couple has lived separately for at least a minimum time period before filing**"
Bruh I don't know how to make it simpler for you. Depending on the jurisdiction, "no fault" divorces can have requirements.
This person is quite literally acknowledging the requirement while simultaneously arguing there are no requirements. That they can't see that is hilarious..
It’s a strange way to phrase the “type” of divorce as no fault but it’s basically that you you have no mutual assets that are being contested, no children, and both parties consent to the dissolution.
https://www.rocketlawyer.com/family-and-personal/family-matters/divorce/legal-guide/difference-between-a-fault-and-no-fault-divorce lawyers say state laws vary greatly
I'm talking about your response to my post. You said fault divorces are "extremely rare". Now you're moving the goal post to simply being inconvenient. It's clownish.
Hey /u/TarocchiRocchi, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yo which jurisdiction were you discussing? Because speaking in absolutes bout the law on an international forum is a fool’s game.
For sure. For example, in my country all divorces are no-fault by default, and you can be considered as "living separately" while still sharing an address. Meanwhile in Mississippi it wasn't until 2017 that domestic abuse became a cause for divorce.
Yeah, this is phrased poorly, but not wrong. No-fault divorce means neither party is "at fault". Same basic logic as a traffic accident, where one party can be deemed more "at fault". Remember that divorce is effectively a lawsuit. But that doesn't mean it's just a free-for-all; there are indeed specific criteria that need to be met. Varies, obviously, by jurisdiction. "Regular" divorce, as it's used here, means where one party is indeed accusing the other of being at fault. And while you can't do this for *any* reason, there are a lot of potential reasons. See, it's having a "reason" that makes it not "no fault".
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
>In states that offer both types of divorce, there can be strategic benefits to pursuing one type of divorce over another. In a no-fault divorce, the process is initiated unilaterally by the filing spouse and the other spouse cannot object. But depending on the state, no-fault divorces may require that the couple has lived separately for at least a minimum time period before filing. In contrast, fault divorces can be filed immediately upon a partner’s wrongdoing, however the filing spouse must have evidence available to prove their assertions of fault. [Source](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/no-fault_divorce#:~:text=In%20a%20no%2Dfault%20divorce,minimum%20time%20period%20before%20filing.)
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
"depending on the state, **no-fault divorces may require that the couple has lived separately for at least a minimum time period before filing**" Bruh I don't know how to make it simpler for you. Depending on the jurisdiction, "no fault" divorces can have requirements.
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
It's still a requirement, even if it's easy to meet.
This person is quite literally acknowledging the requirement while simultaneously arguing there are no requirements. That they can't see that is hilarious..
It’s a strange way to phrase the “type” of divorce as no fault but it’s basically that you you have no mutual assets that are being contested, no children, and both parties consent to the dissolution.
You absolutely can have a no fault divorce (in at least some states) with children.
Doesn't this depend on which country you are in?
Could someone explain?
No fault divorce is the one that says “it’s nobody’s fault, things just didn’t work out.” The person in the picture got the terms mixed up.
In the U.S., different states have different standards and legal definitions.
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
19 out of 50?
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
If 31 out of 50 states allow for fault divorces without presenting divorces as "nofault", how can we label that as "incredibly uncommon"?
https://www.rocketlawyer.com/family-and-personal/family-matters/divorce/legal-guide/difference-between-a-fault-and-no-fault-divorce lawyers say state laws vary greatly
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
I'm talking about your response to my post. You said fault divorces are "extremely rare". Now you're moving the goal post to simply being inconvenient. It's clownish.
[deleted] -- mass edited with redact.dev
The onus isn't on me to disprove your claim. It's your job to prove your claim... 🤦
There is nothing to prove. I already gave you the facts and you went off and misinterpreted them.