36:
162:
In divorce cases, some states allow bifurcation, that permits a divorce case to be finalized with certain aspects, such as property, to be dealt with after dissolution. Some states permit bifurcation, some do not allow it, and some state statutes do not address the issue.
202:
will automatically create a bifurcated trial. In the first stage of the trial, both sides present evidence and testimony designed to establish that the defendant is either guilty or not guilty. If the defendant is guilty, the issue of mental disease is presented.
331:
Arbitral tribunals may bifurcate proceedings into separate stages in cases involving complex issues, to allow for a decision on one phase before considering issues relevant to another phase (for instance, jurisdiction, merits, damages), in the interests of
260:, concluded, "Whatever personal convenience a court may confer on parties by granting an immediate dissolution while retaining property jurisdiction cannot be worth the difficulties and problems to which the trial court is exposing the litigants.". The
166:
In arbitration, bifurcation can be used to get past certain issues, that might otherwise stall negotiations, concluding certain points that are agreed upon, while working on a solution to whatever problem initiated the need for bifurcation.
311:, held that a divorce decree is nonbinding and without legal effect if including bifurcation and without making an award of equitable distribution at the time of dissolution, while the Fourth Department,
341:
179:, judges have wide discretion to structure trials. Factors evaluated will include congruence of issues, complexity for the jury, and possible prejudice to any of the parties. American
349:
290:
345:
53:
353:
119:
337:
247:, prohibits bifurcation except in the most unusual and extenuating circumstances. Some states, by law, preclude bifurcation. The
180:
100:
57:
433:
72:
176:
79:
215:
permits the courts, under certain circumstances, to divide the parties' property "at any time after the judgment".
211:
States have historically taken different views on bifurcation but most state statutes do not address the subject.
46:
86:
465:
270:, held that bifurcation to "resolve issues of marriage dissolution and property distribution is error", and in
238:
199:
470:
280:
68:
251:
261:
155:
proceedings. Criminal trials are also often bifurcated into guilt and sentencing phases, especially in
446:
420:
237:
directs that a judgment of divorce must include a determination of the parties' property rights. The
156:
93:
333:
148:
140:
459:
373:
397:
136:
35:
144:
183:, Rule 42(b) allows the court to decide issues contained in separate trials.
17:
254:, held that all issues must be resolved at the time of dissolution, and in
195:
336:
and where such a decision would not prejudge any subsequent decision. The
248:
228:
244:
Frankel v. Frankel, 274 N.J. Super. 585, 644 A.2d 1132 (App. Div. 1994)
152:
212:
143:
on a set of legal issues without looking at all aspects. Frequently,
273:
Brighton v. Superior Court, 22 Ariz. App. 291, 526 P.2d 1089 (1974)
277:
276:, that bifurcation would fostered rather than deter litigation. A
342:
International Centre for the
Settlement of Investment Disputes
29:
302:
Sullivan v. Sullivan, 174 A.D.2d 862, 571 N.Y.S.2d 154 (1991)
267:
Porter v. Estate of Pigg, 175 Ariz. 303, 856 P.2d 796 (1993)
320:
Johnson, 172 Misc. 2d 684, 658 N.Y.S.2d 780 (Sup. Ct. 1997)
308:
Garcia v. Garcia, 178 A.D.2d 683, 577 N.Y.S.2d 156 (1991)
257:
Humphrey v. Humphrey, 214 Neb. 664, 340 N.W.2d 381 (1983)
27:
A judge's ability in law to divide a trial into two parts
171:
Bifurcation under the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
314:
Zack v. Zack, 183 A.D.2d 382, 590 N.Y.S.2d 632 (1992)
296:
Busa v. Busa, 196 A.D.2d 267, 609 N.Y.S.2d 452 (1994)
286:
Adam v. Stewart, 552 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. Civ. App. 1977)
350:
United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law
60:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
352:(UNCITRAL) rules allow for bifurcation, while the
291:Third Department of New York's Appellate Division
8:
398:"Rule 42. Consolidation; Separate Trials"
317:, rejected these decisions supported by
120:Learn how and when to remove this message
346:World Intellectual Property Organization
135:is a judge's ability in law to divide a
365:
356:(ICC) rules don't address the issue.
224:Alaska Stat. 25.24.160 (Michie 1996)
7:
58:adding citations to reliable sources
289:, disapproved of bifurcation. The
25:
402:LII / Legal Information Institute
378:LII / Legal Information Institute
354:International Chamber of Commerce
187:Bifurcation under state procedure
139:into two parts so as to render a
338:American Arbitration Association
191:State procedures differ widely.
181:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
34:
234:Mich. Ct. R. 3.211(B)(3) (1998)
45:needs additional citations for
198:who has raised the defense of
1:
147:are bifurcated into separate
434:"Art. 23(3) UNCITRAL Rules"
487:
327:Bifurcation in arbitration
218:Alaska Stat. 25.24.155(b)
239:New Jersey Supreme Court
200:mental disease or defect
449:– Retrieved 2012-03-10
423:– Retrieved 2012-03-10
421:bifurcation in divorce
252:Nebraska Supreme Court
207:Bifurcation in divorce
69:"Bifurcation" law
262:Arizona Supreme Court
54:improve this article
447:Use of bifurcation
374:"bifurcated trial"
334:procedural economy
194:In some states, a
130:
129:
122:
104:
16:(Redirected from
478:
450:
444:
438:
437:
430:
424:
418:
412:
411:
409:
408:
394:
388:
387:
385:
384:
370:
281:Court of Appeals
125:
118:
114:
111:
105:
103:
62:
38:
30:
21:
486:
485:
481:
480:
479:
477:
476:
475:
466:Legal procedure
456:
455:
454:
453:
445:
441:
432:
431:
427:
419:
415:
406:
404:
396:
395:
391:
382:
380:
372:
371:
367:
362:
348:(WIPO) and the
329:
209:
189:
173:
126:
115:
109:
106:
63:
61:
51:
39:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
484:
482:
474:
473:
471:Judgment (law)
468:
458:
457:
452:
451:
439:
425:
413:
389:
364:
363:
361:
358:
328:
325:
208:
205:
188:
185:
172:
169:
128:
127:
42:
40:
33:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
483:
472:
469:
467:
464:
463:
461:
448:
443:
440:
435:
429:
426:
422:
417:
414:
403:
399:
393:
390:
379:
375:
369:
366:
359:
357:
355:
351:
347:
344:(ICSID), the
343:
339:
335:
326:
324:
322:
321:
316:
315:
310:
309:
304:
303:
298:
297:
292:
288:
287:
282:
279:
275:
274:
269:
268:
263:
259:
258:
253:
250:
246:
245:
240:
236:
235:
230:
226:
225:
220:
219:
214:
206:
204:
201:
197:
192:
186:
184:
182:
178:
177:Federal Court
170:
168:
164:
160:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
124:
121:
113:
102:
99:
95:
92:
88:
85:
81:
78:
74:
71: –
70:
66:
65:Find sources:
59:
55:
49:
48:
43:This article
41:
37:
32:
31:
19:
18:Penalty phase
442:
428:
416:
405:. Retrieved
401:
392:
381:. Retrieved
377:
368:
330:
319:
318:
313:
312:
307:
306:
301:
300:
295:
294:
285:
284:
272:
271:
266:
265:
256:
255:
243:
242:
233:
232:
223:
222:
217:
216:
210:
193:
190:
174:
165:
161:
132:
131:
116:
107:
97:
90:
83:
76:
64:
52:Please help
47:verification
44:
340:(AAA), the
145:civil cases
133:Bifurcation
460:Categories
407:2021-06-21
383:2021-06-21
360:References
110:March 2018
80:newspapers
196:defendant
149:liability
249:Nebraska
229:Michigan
141:judgment
159:cases.
157:capital
153:damages
94:scholar
305:, and
213:Alaska
96:
89:
82:
75:
67:
278:Texas
264:, in
241:, in
231:law,
137:trial
101:JSTOR
87:books
221:and
151:and
73:news
175:In
56:by
462::
400:.
376:.
323:.
299:,
293:,
283:,
227:.
436:.
410:.
386:.
123:)
117:(
112:)
108:(
98:·
91:·
84:·
77:·
50:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
