Will the spouse who doesn't want a divorce have advantage being petitioner? 6 Answers as of February 16, 2012

From the point of view of the substantive law, there is no advantage. This is a no fault state and bringing the action carries no moral weight with the court. Procedurally however, a petitioner is in a better position to keep the case moving along, or delay it.

Makes no difference which spouse is the petitioner.

There isn't any difference in terms of substance (e.g., one's legal rights or obligations) whether a party is the petitioner or respondent. However, procedurally speaking, it is easier to finish the case by default as the petitioner if the respondent does not file a timely response and otherwise refuses to participate in the case. If you are the respondent, and the petitioner decides to stagnate the case, then you can't proceed by default, but must request that all outstanding matters be resolved by a hearing or trial, depending on the issue. Because you said you're in mediation, it would be wise to raise this issue with the mediator and see if a plan of action (in terms of steps that will be taken to resolve the case) can be mutually agreed upon.

Whether you are the petitioner or respondent in the divorce has no bearing on the property division.

There should be no advantage in the division of assets or debts in a divorce case to the Petitioner just because they filed first. Both parties have equal footing and equal rights to seek a divorce. Thus, it does not really matter who files first. Now, you might want to file first to commence support or get custody orders. But one party should not be preferred over the other one just because they are the Petitioner.

There is no advantage to being petitioner. It only means that is the person who filed first. California is a no fault divorce state so blame for the end of the marriage is not determined.