<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Senterfitt &#38; Knight</title>
	<atom:link href="http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://skfamilylaw.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:17:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Highsmith v. Highsmith: Sometimes, equitable division just isn&#8217;t fair.</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=609</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=609#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equitable division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonmarital property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=609</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Andrea Knight In a decision entered September 12, 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed a decision that illustrates the different results obtained from using premarital funds to buy a traceable asset like real estate versus transferring premarital funds to a joint account to buy real estate. Â In this case, Mrs. Highsmith contributed $210,000 of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=609</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ward v. Ward: More Cold Water on Prohibitions of Overnight Visitors</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=605</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=605#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 03:32:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Child Custody]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=605</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Andrea Knight In a decision entered May 31, 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court entered another opinion striking down a so-called morality clause prohibiting parents from having a boyfriend or girlfriend spend the night while a parent has custody of a child. Â However, as with the prior ones struck, the provision differs rather significantly from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=605</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Front Load Alimony without Triggering Recapture</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=559</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=559#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 13:52:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alimony]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Andrea Knight Alimony lookback rules remind me of memorizing rules for oddly spelled words originating in Old or Middle English, such as &#8220;I before E except after C&#8221;. Â Simple enough, but odd. Â I think that is because the look back period makes terrific sense from a tax policy perspective, but feels counterintuitive when negotiating [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=559</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Assumptions Behind Plain Language</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=547</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=547#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 16:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plain Language]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=547</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Andrea Knight Â  Ran across this lovely speech by Peter Butt from the University of Sydney. Â I wanted to draw out the highlights so I&#8217;ve edited the original speech for a quick look. &#8220;Suppose you want to impose on a tenant the obligation to repair the leased premises. Â &#8221;The tenant must repair the premises.&#8221; [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=547</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Long v. Long: when custody pending in both Juvenile and Superior, the 1st filed takes precedent.</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=517</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=517#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 18:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Law Update]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Custody]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deprivation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=517</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Andrea Knight Long v. Long (3/29/10) was a direct appeal filed by the mother of the children of multiple orders issued in a divorce action that effectively conflated a deprivation case pending in Juvenile with the divorce case in Superior Court, and then assumed jurisdiction over all pending matters in both cases in Juvenile. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=517</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Michel v. Michel: Georgia Courts Have Authority to Divide Military Retirements When 10 Year Requirement Not Met</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=515</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=515#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equitable division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=515</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Michel v. Michel (S10F0372, March 29, 2010), the court considered an appeal by the wife from a final divorce decree. Â The trial court ruled it was preempted by federal law from dividing the military retirement benefits because the marriage was less than 10 years. Â The Georgia Supreme Court reversed, noting that the federal statute [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=515</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Japan Solidifies Plans to Join Hague Convention on Custody Jurisdiction</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=509</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=509#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:14:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Custody]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hague Convention]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=509</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Andrea Knight Today, the Japanese government confirmed it will move forward with its pledge to join the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Â Diplomatic pressures have been mounting for Japan in its relationship with Europe and North America as Japan and Russia continue to be the only members of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=509</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Todd v. Todd: Supreme Court Eliminates Right of Direct Appeal of Custody Decisions in Most Divorces</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=507</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=507#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrea Knight</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Law Update]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Custody]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divorce]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=507</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Effective January 1, 2008, the Georgia General Assembly via House Bill 369 rewrote all of Georgia&#8217;s child custody statutes. Â From the practical perspective of daily life as a divorce attorney in Atlanta, the biggest impact was the new (and often irritating) requirement to file a parenting plan. Â Luckily, Cobb County divorces and Fulton County divorces [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=507</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another tale of two marriages &amp; FaceBook</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=505</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=505#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:11:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shelley Senterfitt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today&#8217;s Atlanta Journal Constitution has a story about a wife who made an upsetting discovery on FaceBook. When faced with some pretty good evidence that her husband was having an affair, the wife went on the paramour&#8217;s FaceBook page (which was open to the public) and found wedding pictures of this woman with her husband! [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=505</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New law allows jurisdiction over out of state parties</title>
		<link>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=502</link>
		<comments>http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=502#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shelley Senterfitt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skfamilylaw.com/?p=502</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SB 491 was signed by the Governor and went into effect on July 1. This bill was sponsored by Sen. Bill Cowsert at the request of the Family Law Section of the State Bar of Georgia. It clarifies that Georgia courts can continue to exercise jurisdiction over individuals who move out of state to enforce [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://skfamilylaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=502</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
