Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

I would give gas allowance to all the employees that drove every week. My husband didn't get any extra benefits from anybody else. My husbands cousins ex is married living in a $500k house that his wife bought while they were married and she owns a company paying him minimum wage and she gets everything else and my husbands cousin cannot get an increase in child support because the judge she has says that is his wives money and it is not included, so it cannot be right for one and not the other. They laws cannot change.

---

Well, if I were your cousin I would get a better lawyer, but that's really not the point here.

The other thing to consider is that your husband's ex's lawyer might just be trolling to see what he can find. It wouldn't be the first time in history that a lawyer pursued something that he knew was fruitless in order to generate fees.

They are not arguing I under paid him they are saying he benefits from the money I make so she should also. So basically that is saying I am responsible for his kids. What am I to do not allow him to live with me because I pay the rent and all the other household bills, which he would benefit from that. They cannot do that it shouldn't matter how much money I make I earned it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

They are not arguing I under paid him they are saying he benefits from the money I make so she should also. So basically that is saying I am responsible for his kids. What am I to do not allow him to live with me because I pay the rent and all the other household bills, which he would benefit from that. They cannot do that it shouldn't matter how much money I make I earned it.

---

Most places will not account for that. I know most of Canada does consider spousal income however, and some places in the US.

ggill, reread this paragraph:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevetcg

The other thing to consider is that your husband's ex's lawyer might just be trolling to see what he can find. It wouldnt be the first time in history that a lawyer pursued something that he knew was fruitless in order to generate fees.

---

You're not going to know until you go to court and see what the judge has to say. From what you've posted, it sounds like you're in the clear. But again, you won't know until the judge reviews everything.

But what the attorney is requesting is completely legal. The problem is that you have it stuck in your head that they're going after "your" money. They're not. They're looking at it this way: if your husband doesn't contribute to the financial responsibilities in his own home, why shouldn't the support be increased? If he's wasting money on himself, he should be able to give it to his children. That's why they're taking this avenue.

Odds are you'll be fine, but you can never guarantee anything in court.

He doesn't have but maybe $100 left out of his pay after child support comes out. He pays for the gas and what food he can buy and all my money goes on our bills, we barely have food to eat for a week. He isn't blowing his money there is never none left. Depending on how many hours he gets to work it could be less left after child support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

He doesn't have but maybe $100 left out of his pay after child support comes out. He pays for the gas and what food he can buy and all my money goes on our bills, we barely have food to eat for a week. He isn't blowing his money there is never none left. Depending on how many hours he gets to work it could be less left after child support.

---

Then its entirely possible you can counterclaim to LOWER child support payments.

I Strongly recommend you to look up the law explaining such details, as any advice from here is from random people, you can't tell who is or is not a lawyer.
You'd be best to try and look up a 1-800# to a Law-line (free legal advice from lawyers over the phone.), or maybe ask a lawyer and see if you can get a free half hour of advice, or go to a court house and see if they have duty councel, then see if they will take time to speak with you on the matter. Or maybe if you have Legal aid (lawyers who represent and councel you for free, depending on your income.)

That's about the best I can think of for money issues, but since you said money isn't an issue; I highly advise you to talk to a lawyer. After all it's not about the money...

My child will be 18 in nov she will not graduate until she turns 21 due to learning disabilities I need to know when her dad will no longer have to pay child support

Where was the divorce granted? Maryland? Texas?

If he was ordered to pay child support, the circumstances of the birth (adultery, not his child) do not matter.

A pre-nup protects your (or his) assets upon death.

If you are this concerned about shielding your assets you MUST consult with an attorney, providing all your paperwork for his/her review.

Nobody can be forced to exercise their visitation right. If he continues to receive a credit on his child support based on visitation days, but never uses them, they can go back and redo child support order.

[QUOTE=Susan2936;1795769][QUOTE=stevetcg;1625934]You aren't seeming to understand what we are saying: the question isn't what he makes, the question is why he makes a different wage than you do.

Quote:

---

I'm confused by this statement... if she is the owner of the company and her husband is not (he is a regular joe employee), then doesn't it make sense that she makes more? Or is there some sort of "community property" thing here because they're married?

Thanks!
Susan

---

The question is because they are married. If she were the president of a publicly owned company and he was just some employee the question wouldn't be asked. I asked because since she OWNS the company, it becomes a lawyer's billing dream to figure out why their salaries are different since presumably they are equals.

A lot of the milking horror stories you hear are the ex spouse going after more regardless of entitlement and LAWYERS doing the milking.

Many states will not account for the new spouses income. Some will account for the fact that the paying spouse presumably has less expenses so can pay more of their salary. However, most states are on a percentage based system now which doesn't account for spousal income.

Many states do allow for disestablishment of paternity which is grounds for support removal. Many have statutes of limitations also so depending on the age of the children, that might factor in.

As for them in your house, we addressed that in your other thread, but its only an issue if you choose for it to be. As for her checking herself into a mental health facility... no one is going to show up and drop the kids on your doorstep. His parental rights give him first right of custody but if he refuses (his right to do so) they become the problem of the state to foster or find other family. On the flip side, she might lose HER rights to the kids.

You mentioned giving up his rights... he cannot unless someone is going to adopt, so might as well quash that line of thinking.

Ulitmately you will need to get a lawyer to get the disestablishment done. That's really your best bet.

As said no, he dosen't have to use his visitation. By not doing so he will risk the ability to visit if he ever wants it again. As for the child support it depends on how much visitation he has because child support is calculated using a formula and I don't know which state has jurisdiction in his case but if it is TX (which is quite like my state) if he has a great deal of nights at his house child support could be recalculated. But with out knowing those things I can't give you a clear answer.

Maybe I missed it but where is this located at? That will make a huge difference.

Im sorry but there is something I find VERY disturbing.
( quote ) Yes, of course I am biased against this woman, I fully admit that. But I also never want those children to be forced upon my fiancé against his will. From what I understand, she is raising them in ways with which I do not agree and they are already demonstrating behaviors that I find abhorrent. In short, I do not want them in our house or mingling with our future children because of some serious differences in values.

And yes, I do understand not punishing the children for the mother's transgressions. But every child must bear the consequences of their parents' choices, right? I know that I did. And ultimately, they are not my concern… my future husband and our own family is my concern. ( end quote )

I find statements like these very selfish and not inline with parenting at all. It seems that with this attitude you shouldn't consider children till you realize they are not possesions. When you agree to marry someone you not only take on a future with them but also their past. That attitude taken into a courtroom will get you nowhere. Please consider that the children because he raised them are his and he might try to accept that too.

It's a table (calculation) in Texas, not by Statute.

Texas Child Support Calculator - AllLaw.com

Because of the different questions, each one adding more info, I am requesting that these threads by combined.

Deleted my response.

Realized I was giving the wrong kind of advice for the legal boards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinawords

Maybe I missed it but where is this located at? That will make a huge difference.

---

Original question PLUS #5 - not saying it's a done deal for the other side but I think this arrangement certainly is fodder for Attorneys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Susan2936

I hope it's okay that I'm posting multiple questions in one day... they're sort of separate topics.

The ex wife is the custodial parent and my fiance is the non-custodial parent with visitation rights of two children (not his biological kids...essentially stepchildren). We live in MD and they live in TX.

Please no moral responses... just legal ones: If he no longer wishes to have a relationship with the children (but he will continue court ordered child support) can she or the courts force him to visit?

For example, the divorce decree states that he will have the right to visitation on "Christmas in odd numbered years." Does that mean he must take them for Christmas in 2009? Or only that he has the right to ask for it if he wants it but can voluntarily decline to do so?

If he declines to see them anymore, is that somehow violating the divorce decree...thereby opening the door for the ex to go back to court and to possibly ask for more child support?

I may be over simplifying this...but any advice/precedent would be much appreciated.

Thanks!
Susan

---

I'm glad everyone seems to have gotten this right. There is no such thing in American law as "forced visitation." Forced child support, yes. Visitation, no.