Star City Divorce & Family Law Lawyer, Arkansas


William Mcshane Bridgforth

Child Support, Divorce, Domestic Violence & Neglect, Family Law
Status:  In Good Standing           

William Cecil Bridgforth

Child Support, Divorce, Domestic Violence & Neglect, Family Law
Status:  In Good Standing           

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-620-0900

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.


Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

TIPS

Lawyer.com can help you easily and quickly find Star City Divorce & Family Law Lawyers and Star City Divorce & Family Law Firms. Refine your search by specific Divorce & Family Law practice areas such as Adoption, Child Custody, Child Support, Divorce and Family Law matters.

LEGAL TERMS

QMSCO

See Qualified Medical Child Support Order.

FAULT DIVORCE

A tradition that required one spouse to prove that the other spouse was legally at fault, to obtain a divorce. The 'innocent' spouse was then granted the divorc... (more...)
A tradition that required one spouse to prove that the other spouse was legally at fault, to obtain a divorce. The 'innocent' spouse was then granted the divorce from the 'guilty' spouse. Today, 35 states still allow a spouse to allege fault in obtaining a divorce. The traditional fault grounds for divorce are adultery, cruelty, desertion, confinement in prison, physical incapacity and incurable insanity. These grounds are also generally referred to as marital misconduct.

IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES

Differences between spouses that are considered sufficiently severe to make married life together more or less impossible. In a number of states, irreconcilable... (more...)
Differences between spouses that are considered sufficiently severe to make married life together more or less impossible. In a number of states, irreconcilable differences is the accepted ground for a no-fault divorce. As a practical matter, courts seldom, if ever, inquire into what the differences actually are, and routinely grant a divorce as long as the party seeking the divorce says the couple has irreconcilable differences. Compare incompatibility; irremediable breakdown.

STEPPARENT ADOPTION

The formal, legal adoption of a child by a stepparent who is living with a legal parent. Most states have special provisions making stepparent adoptions relativ... (more...)
The formal, legal adoption of a child by a stepparent who is living with a legal parent. Most states have special provisions making stepparent adoptions relatively easy if the child's noncustodial parent gives consent, is dead or missing, or has abandoned the child.

SURVIVORS BENEFITS

An amount of money available to the surviving spouse and minor or disabled children of a deceased worker who qualified for Social Security retirement or disabil... (more...)
An amount of money available to the surviving spouse and minor or disabled children of a deceased worker who qualified for Social Security retirement or disability benefits.

CLOSE CORPORATION

A corporation owned and operated by a few individuals, often members of the same family, rather than by public shareholders. State laws permit close corporation... (more...)
A corporation owned and operated by a few individuals, often members of the same family, rather than by public shareholders. State laws permit close corporations to function more informally than regular corporations. For example, shareholders can make decisions without holding meetings of the board of directors, and can fill vacancies on the board without a vote of the shareholders.

ADOPTION

A court procedure by which an adult becomes the legal parent of someone who is not his or her biological child. Adoption creates a parent-child relationship rec... (more...)
A court procedure by which an adult becomes the legal parent of someone who is not his or her biological child. Adoption creates a parent-child relationship recognized for all legal purposes -- including child support obligations, inheritance rights and custody.

POT TRUST

A trust for children in which the trustee decides how to spend money on each child, taking money out of the trust to meet each child's specific needs. One impor... (more...)
A trust for children in which the trustee decides how to spend money on each child, taking money out of the trust to meet each child's specific needs. One important advantage of a pot trust over separate trusts is that it allows the trustee to provide for one child's unforeseen need, such as a medical emergency. But a pot trust can also make the trustee's life difficult by requiring choices about disbursing funds to the various children. A pot trust ends when the youngest child reaches a certain age, usually 18 or 21.

DILUTION

A situation in which a famous trademark or service mark is used in a context in which the mark's reputation for quality is tarnished or its distinction is blurr... (more...)
A situation in which a famous trademark or service mark is used in a context in which the mark's reputation for quality is tarnished or its distinction is blurred. In this case, trademark infringement exists even though there is no likelihood of customer confusion, which is usually required in cases of trademark infringement. For example, the use of the word Candyland for a pornographic site on the Internet was ruled to dilute the reputation of the Candyland mark for the well-known children's game, even though the traditional basis for trademark infringement (probable customer confusion) wasn't an issue.