please advise

[javaxmlsoapdev]

One of my relatives is getting divorced in delaware state for adultery reason. both parties are ready to sign divorce documents and get seperated happily. my question is; what's the procedure? what forms do they have to sign and present to whom? we are very new to this and not sure do we really need a lawyer to represent the case especially when both parties are ready?? please advise.

 

[saigc]

not sure of the procedure or forms for divorce in delaware BUT

One of my relatives is getting divorced in delaware state for adultery reason. both parties are ready to sign divorce documents and get seperated happily. my question is; what's the procedure? what forms do they have to sign and present to whom? we are very new to this and not sure do we really need a lawyer to represent the case especially when both parties are ready?? please advise.

not sure of the procedure or forms for divorce in delaware BUT....

adultery is a crime of moral turpitude. it has adverse effect on immigrants – its a deportable offense (applies to greencard holders too).

better check with immigration attorney how this will affect “if they are required to quote the reason” for divorce in the state of Delaware.

 

[javaxmlsoapdev]

not sure of the procedure or forms for divorce in delaware BUT....

adultery is a crime of moral turpitude. it has adverse effect on immigrants – its a deportable offense (applies to greencard holders too).

better check with immigration attorney how this will affect “if they are required to quote the reason” for divorce in the state of Delaware.

Both are US citizen so no immigration issues here. just wanted to find out when both are ready to seperate happily, can divorce be filed w/o attorney's help. anyone?

 

[saigc]

No, adultery is not a crime, much less a CIMT, and therefore doesn't make a person deportable.
It has an effect on naturalization, indicating a "lack of moral character."

it IS a crime of moral turpitude and is deportable offense. pls google with terms adultery, immigration you will find 100s of sources mainly from immigration law firms.

 

[saigc]

Wrong
No, I did not. Maybe you should recheck your sources.

My source is the law:
What I alluded to is that adultery shows a "lack of moral character", as per 8 CFR 316.10:
"(3) Unless the applicant establishes extenuating circumstances, the applicant shall be found to lack good moral character if, during the statutory period, the applicant:
...
(ii) Had an extramarital affair which tended to destroy an existing marriage"

The "good moral character" is a requirement for naturalization, but lack of it doesn't lead to deportation.

if you want to just argue and stick to "your" law then no one can argue with you.

i am not capable to wake a person who pretend as sleeping. enjoy your world.

as always i am ignoring your baseless arguments (i do respect your response to "some" threads but not all. )

end of arguments.

 

[Jim Mills]

It's not as easy as either of you appear to believe.

The State Department as indicated that it thinks that adultry does involve moral turpitude. See Foriegn Affairs Manual Sec. 40.21(a) N. 2.3-3(a).

Courts have been all over the place in determining this matter.

For cases stating that adultery is NOT a CIMT, see Dickhoff v. Shaughnessy, 142 F. Supp. 535 (D.NY. 1956); Application of Barug, 76 F. Supp. 407 (D. Cal. 1948); Matter of O, 2 I&N Dec. 840 (BIA 1947).

For cases stating that adultery IS a CIMT, see Tourny v, Reimer, 8 F. Supp. 91 (S.D.N.Y. 1934); Matter of C, 3 I&N Dec. 790 (BIA 1949); Matter of A, 3 I&N Dec. 168 (BIA 1948).

The cases are obviously quite old. There has more recently developed an administrative policy of not considering an admission of adultery to be a CIMT in the absence of a conviction. See Chen Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206 (1968), which states that the administrative policy has been longstanding. The absence of more recent caselaw seems to indicate that the policy of finding not adultery to be a CIMT, at least in the absence of a conviction, still stands and the absence of caselaw on point also indicates that conviction for adultery almost never occurs.

Joe correctly points out that adultery that destroys a viable marriage may be somewhat problematic.