Legally, I don't think this is really an option. You could try divorce court, which favores the woman in a large percentage, regardless of the actual law. Honestly this sounds gold digger-esque, trying to "score" a house. Hope a court doesn't see this.

In the Good Old USA, the issue at hand is not one about paying the bills, but about the type of agreement involved and the rights of the parties under the laws of these agreements. The issues is not one of federal law, but of common law, which pretty much applies to all 50 states, except maybe Louisiana ( their equivalent of common law is based on Napoleanoic Code) and Texas ( they do their own thing) Under BASIC Common Law, A LEASE IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN TWO PARTIES ENTITLING ONE PARTY, THE RENTERS, THE RIGHT TO USE PROPERTY OF THE LANDLORD IN RETURN FOR PAYING RENT. WHILE EACH STATE HAS VARIATIONS ON ITS RENTAL LAW, ESSENTIALLY THE FUNDEMENTAL ASPECTS OF LEASES/CONTRACT LAW ARE THE SAME. A DIVORCE COURT CANNOT INVALIDATE A LEASE. NOR CAN ONE SPOUSE THROW ANOTHER OUT IF BOTH NAMES ARE ON THE LEASE AS BOTH PARTIES HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE THE PROPERTY UNLESS THE RENT STOPS BEING PAID. Now, here's where I agree with you. If the rent stops being paid, you can garnish wages, or seek redress through the courts---BUT YOU CANNOT THROW YOUR SPOUSE OUT OF THE PROPERTY IF THEIR NAME IS ON THE LEASE UNLESS TWO THINGS HAPPEN 1) The spouse in question has to agree 2) The landlord has to agree And most importantly, a new lease or an addendum MUST be gdrawn up. Unless a restraining order is issued by a court, for cause ( ie: my spouse is a danger to me) the courts cannot break the lease. If a restraining order is issued, then, the financial responsibility of the individuals names on the lease still exist, but, the spouse cannot return to the apartment. All 50 states have what I just described as basic rental law--some states are more favorable to the renters, and some are more favorable to the landlord, but essentially this is the law in all 50 states. A MORTGAGE ON THE OTHER HAND ENTAILS OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY BY A PERSON(S) OR A COUPLE---The mortgage is a contract as well, but it is not a contract whereby you have temporary rights to a property. A mortgage is entered for the purposes of acquiring property. Any property among married individuals is considered a marriage asset. While Redjohn is correct that individuals do not own title outright until the mortgage is paid off, he misses the fact that in the USA, all state usury laws require some form of equity to build on the property during the period of the mortgage. The people/couple named in the mortgage jointly own this equity. Additionally, since the goal of the mortgage is permanent ownership, a court has the right to intervene in a dispute between a husband and wife without the approval of the mortgage company to divide the marriage assets if no compromise between parties can be reached. When you pay a mortgage, one spouse can be kicked out of the property and still be required to pay for the mortgage. The court could assign the asset to the wife, or husband. In other circumstances, the court can order the property sold and the proceeds used to pay off the loan with any excess being split between the husband/wife. WHEN IT COMES TO RENTING---SHORT OF A RESTRAINING ORDER FOR CAUSE, THERE IS LEGALLY NOTHING YOU CAN DO TO GET SOMEONE KICKED OUT OF AN APARTMENT WHEN THEIR NAME IS ON THE LEASE IF THEY WANT TO STAY. It is much easier to kick someone out of a house with a mortgage than it is an apartment or other rental property. ======================================= You question requires alot more information to make a good answer, however taken on its face value. Are you both on the lease or is just hubby on the lease? If you are both on the lease then are you both contributing 50-50 to the expenses of the apartment. Leases, unlike ownership of houses are more difficult in divorce cases to settle because the parties, namely you and your husband enter into an agreement with a third party to pay them for the use of real property. SO from a legal standpoint, he is in a real problem area because if you throw him out, he is still responsible for the payment of the lease, yet he would not be entitled to using what he paid for. Why? Because in almost all 50 states and DC, PR and other territories, the law recognizes that people renting property are doing so only temporary. It is alot easier to get someone removed from your house than from an apartment. How much time is left on your lease? It may be possible for you to move out early and get a new place, or have the lease changed to only your name. The key point here is that when trying to claim for expenses, you would not be permitted to claim housing expenses for the time period during which hubby would have been living with you. If his name is on the lease, then the question asked has to be: does the lease predate your marriage. If it does, then there is virtually little you can do to kick him out, unless he has done something to cause an order of restraint against him. Additionally, you also run the risk of the landlord not wanting to extend the lease to you--especially if you are an at-will resident. without any more information, the short answer is no, and also, in 28 states, your phrasing of the question above would reflect bad on you if you were to go into court. The best way to win at divorce, if you have to fight is to remain cool and play the law correctly--not from an emotional standpoint. I wouldn't classify your question as gold-diggerish, but I would question the integrity of your position solely onthe wording of your question above, without any more information. You may be justified in asking it, but this type of question, without further information is not necessarially one that can be easily answered and perhaps AB might want to reconsider these types in the future.... There is asignificant difference between a lease and a mortgage. A lease is a long term debt instrument that is used to finance the purchase of real property. A lease, typically is short term in its duration and does not confer permanent ownership of real property. As such, the property can revert back to the landlord at any time. To put it another way, each time you pay a mortgage, you build equity in a property--at some point in the future your equity will be 100% and you will have title to the property. Since you have some ownership in a property financed by a mortgage, the property can be assigned--meaning, either the parties on the mortgage, or say, the courts can make a determination over who will control the property. That's how one spouse or another could wind up with the property in a divorce. Once the assignment has been made, as a matter of law, the parties not assigned are relived of their responsibilities by the court, unless otherwise directed. Example #1: Spouse A/B go through a divorce. They pay mortgage on a house in which they jointly are listed as co-payers and they have 20% equity on the property. The court orders a divorce for both parties and in awarding joint property, spouse B is awarded and assigned the property according to the court order. Under the court order, spouse B has been assigned the property and is now 100% responsible for all bills. Spouse A has been relieved of the burden of ownership. They do not have to pay any monies to cover the mortgage by virtue of the court's decree. Example: Same as above. This time instead of one single order, the court makes two orders: Order #1: Assignment Award: Property is awarded and rights are assigned to Spouse B. Order #2: Spouse A is ordered to pay a portion of the mortgage until such time as either : (1) the court decrees, during periodic reviews of the situation (2) Children reach the age of majority, (3) Indefinitely, (4) Until Spouse B remarries or enters into a union with another individual in which reasonable sharing of expenses would be expected. In other words, the court has to make 2 decisions---its so common to make the decisions in one directive that people forget that the issue is actually two separate issues---ownership is the first issue and support is the second issue.

If he wants the divorce, i wonder why he is still living with you and not already out of the apartment? the key, to your question, might be found in domestic violence. have either of you been involved in domestic violence, where an actual assault occured, by either party? if your husband assaulted you, and the police were called and a report made, this would be cause for a restraining order to keep your husband away from you and thus, the apartment. if not, the law, in most states, gives him the right to be in the apartment, if he is on a valid lease. the wording , in your lease, might give you relief. this is a common problem the police face daily.

Although other posters have stated that the financial obligation of the lease may be an issue, it really isn't. People who own homes and have a financial obligation for the mortgage are in exactly the same situation. Yes, his name is on the document, but the finance company or leaseholder will get their money the fastest and easiest way they can. They don't care who pays the rent, just as long as someone does. If both parties won't or can't, the first one they can squeeze the cash out of in court will do just fine. For example, it is difficult to force a self-employed person to pay, but a paycheque can be easily garnished. As to the reality of "kicking" someone out - that is a somewhat different matter. He is under no obligation to leave his home if the marriage breaks down. Eventually someone will leave, but there is no reason for him to be forced out unless he presents a personal safety problem (in which case I would ask why you remain under the same roof with him). I am not certain that you could easily "force" him out. If, for example, you were caring for a relative living with you or had dependent children, there could be legal support for your remaining. However, if neither of you has any obligations that would necessitate your remaining there, one party cannot really "force" the other out. This is something that the two of you are going to have to work out between yourselves. If both of you refuse to move, then you will need to resolve the matter in court. There is no guarantee that a court case will go in your favour. Or in his. It is unfortunate that you marriage has failed and that one of you has to leave. However, I would not use this situation to make things worse by creating more stress than already exists. If you really cannot stand living with this person - and most people whose relationships have recently broken down feel this way - you need to make decisions that are best for you. If this is an untolerably stressful situation, you would probably help yourself by leaving. If you absolutely do not want to move and you cannot reach a resolution with your partner, you will need to take this matter up with the courts. ------------------------------------------------------------ Re: "In the USA..." and other comments here and elsewhere regarding this question. I'm not certain that the individual who has provided a comment here and several in his own answer to this question has actually READ my answer, which states: "As to the reality of "kicking" someone out - that is a somewhat different matter. ... I am not certain that you could easily "force" him out." That's pretty clear, so I fail to understand what all the SHOUTING is all about. I never stated that one party could coerce the other to leave. On the matter of finances, if person A and person B have co-signed a lease, both are responsible for paying the rent. (Check with all those parents who co-signed their child's first lease and then had to pick up the tab when junior defaulted on the payments.) If neither chooses to pay, the landlord can take them to court and have their wages garnished. If a garnish cannot be placed on A's income for some reason, but can on B's, then B gets to pay. First caught, first pays. B can then take A to court over the financial issue, but, meantime, the landlord is being paid. If A and B co-sign a mortgage, the same applies: one or both of them must make mortgage payments. If they don't pay, the mortgage holder can take them to court and ask to have their wages garnished. Again, it is then up to A and B to sort this out in court. The financial aspect is simple: someone pays, voluntarily or through legal coercion. So be careful when your partner leaves, because you might get stuck for a tab beyond your ability to pay if the departing partner suddenly feels tight of wallet. ------------------------------------------------------------ The legal details regarding property rental and home ownership are not a federal matter and vary with the jurisdiction in both the US and Canada. That makes 50 variations on the theme in the US and 13 in Canada. The simple fact of the matter is, it matters little if the property is rented or 'owned' - you don't have title until the mortage is discharged. Your equity is an asset, but that is little solace when you need a roof over your head tonight. And while the assets of a marriage or common-law relationship are divided 50-50 and all the loose ends are, hopefully, tied up once the settlement is sanctified by the courts, that event usually does not arrive for several years. The immediate effects of the breakdown happen today, months before the courts are even approached by many. If you don't pay the rent, you can be evicted and/or have your paycheque garnished to cover the landlord's expenses and back rent. If your name is on the lease, you are legally liable to pay. Any legal protection you might have is provided by landlord-tenant legislation. Landlords will start the eviction process as soon as they can, to ensure the shortest delay if an eviction is necessary. This can be as early as one month after a rent payment is missed. If it takes a landlord three months to go through the eviction process, you can be sure they will start it as soon as possible. this makes for a stressful situation. If you don't pay your mortgage, the bank can seize 'your' property and sell it. They don't often do it and generally prefer to keep the mortgage payments flowing, but they can and will sell your home if they believe it to their benefit. They usually have the final say on this matter, unless you ask the courts to intervene and they rule in your favour. By that time, the house is usually on the market. You will be given the value of your equity, but equity is not a roof and the black mark on your credit rating will damage your ability to purchase a new home immediately. The bank will garnish the first paycheque to which they can attach an order. It is then the responsibility of the garnishee to take the bank to court to alter the situation. If one co-owner is self-employed and the other has a 'regular' job, the one with the paycheque will be the first one garnished. (A close friend once had 20% of her gross income garnished at source, placing herself and her three children well below the poverty line. The courts reduced it to 10% on appeal - a difficult and highly stressful situation that was not resolved until the property was sold several months later. She consolidated what remained of her debts into a loan. The divorce settlement came four years later. What equity?) Footnote: I was on the board of a lobby group that worked with the Ontario government on child support issues for many years. A lawyer who worked in family law and related legal matters also served on the board. Every member of the board and the overwhelming majority of the thosands of members had lived through the consequences of a marriage breakdown. Many of the board members and those I met who were in close contact with the board had experienced problems with living arrangements. The majority of breakdowns are anything but neat and tidy - that future settlement has no impact on the rent or mortgage payment due last week. By the way, working with a government on the development of the legal framework of society is a fascinating and rewarding way of participating in the democratic process. Highly recommended if the opportunity passes your way. Making a presentation to and participating in a hearing of the House Standing Committee on the Administration of Justice in Ontario was a real experience.

If your husband balks at leaving, then you leave - when he is at work or away from the apartment. Don't create a situation of opposition. Take what is yours and what you need and just go and start another life. You don't need emotional gridlock with heightened emotional confrontation.

My messed up soon to be ex husband kicked me and my 2 sons out of our house of 9 years. I have fibromyalgia and am unable to work so he decided that I was no longer useful. I want to file a disclosure of information so I can at least get what he owes me for the 4 years we were married. I don't know how to do it. My poor kids felt so bad but now they say they would never go back because of all the emotional abuse. I asked him to leave MULTIPLE times {his parents live 2 blocks away} but he refused. His name is also on the mortgage.I am not so sure you can legally get him to go. You should ask a attorney about it. GOOD LUCK!!!

Go see a DIVORCE LAWYER !! Let him or her handle getting your husband OUT ...

With your foot

You don't, but work out a solution as to who will stay and who will leave... Try marriage counselor, or a divorce mediator to help work out the separation amicably [no fighting] and then decide who gets what? [Otherwise, find an attorney you like a lot; because he/she will end up with both of your monies]