Okay, this one’s family law-related (and makes two posts in one night after none for almost a year!).
A couple months ago, a man filed a motion to enforce part of his divorce decree against his ex-wife. The portion of the order he was asking the court to enforce was a “morality clause”. A morality clause essentially says that a parent cannot have someone he or she is in a romantic relationship with in the house, between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., while that parent is in possession of the children.
This is a very common order while a divorce case is pending. But, in this case, it was included in the divorce decree – meaning that it stayed in effect indefinitely after the case was over. Apparently, after the these people’s divorce was finalized, the ex-wife began a relationship with another woman. The woman eventually moved in with the ex-wife, at which point the ex-husband said “Not so fast” and filed his motion to enforce. Here’s a story on the case:
Judge Roach has gotten some bad press for his ruling, which is unfortunate because he’s a pretty good judge. Its also worth noting that, when you look back at the full history of the case, you find that after the trial of the divorce, the ex-wife filed a “motion to sign” with a proposed divorce decree attached. That decree, which the ex-wife was asking Judge Roach to sign, contained the morality clause. Perfect example of the old saying “Be careful what you ask for, because you may just get it.”