• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

CA "fair" SS & duration

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

BSTEPP

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

The facts:

* Marriage of long duration with parties married 05/02/81, agreed upon separation date of 05/01/00, & petition filed by husband on 07/11/05.

* Petitioner, ex-husband, has been providing financial support (ranging from $750-$1400/mo) to Respondent, wife, every month since the separation date of 05/01/00, primarily due to their youngest son living with her until 09/06. Petitioner stopped paying Respondent on 05/01/00 when their youngest son moved out & she obtained a temporary support order in the amount of $1,001/mo, based on his current income that has significantly increased since date of separation.

* Wages at & prior to separation as follows: Petitioner 2000=$77,734, 1999=$50,091, 1998=$7,623, 1997=$30k est., 1996=$32,108, 1995=$28,210. Respondent 2000=$30,695, 1999=$25,851, 1998=$28,939, 1997=$26k est., 1996=$23,650, 1995=$19,830. Petitioner’s income was all self-employment salary, with the exception of 2000, so the exact amount of total income is unclear.

* Marital status was terminated on 08/07/07, but parties are still trying to negotiate a Stipulated Judgment on all other issues. It is agreed, but currently absent a written agreement, that Respondent keeps all community property (approx. value $34.5k) with the exception of Petitioner’s 401k (approx. value $2,300). Respondent would bear approx. $44.7k of community debt, while Petitioner would bear over $232k of community debt. Majority of Petitioner’s debt is due to failed business expenses including taxes & more that must be consolidated.

Both parties have been trying to negotiate on reserved issues for the past couple of years. At first, Respondent wanted lifetime support of $750/mo, despite currently working for the for the USPS for over 14 years, with a salary of over $45k/yr. Respondent is now asking for $550/mo nonmodifiable support for the period of 6 years. Respondent has vowed to return to court every year to modify support if this is not agreed upon. Petitioner wants to finally end this, but is in the construction business as a Civil Engineer & nonmodifiable support doesn’t appear to be an ideal option in this struggling economy. Petitioner has consulted with 2 attorneys in the area that provided different answers. One said this was “fair” since there will be an end in sight & temporary support will be cut in half; the other said actual self-employment income would have to be discovered & since it’s been so long since the date of separation that more weight could be held on current income instead.

Pursuant to California Family Code section 4320: 1) Respondent has maintained a secure position for over 14 years with the USPS & doesn’t need retraining; 2) Respondent did not contribute to Petitioner’s education or training as a Civil Engineer; 3) Marital standard of living was very middle class through out most of the marriage; 4) There are no minor children to consider; 5) Petitioner has several health problems, including diabetes, & both parties are over 50; 5) No history of domestic violence.


1) Despite this being a marriage of long duration, doesn’t the court look down on lifetime support or the supported spouse making no effort of becoming self-supporting?

2) What would be a "fair" spousal support amount & duration under these following conditions?

3) Should Petitioner walk away with nearly all the debt & still have to pay additional spousal support?

4) This case was calendared for trial on 07/07/08, after 4 failed MSC, but Respondent was able to have the trial vacated without Petitioner's knowledge in order to extend her high temporary spousal support. Should Petitioner attempt to take this back to trial again at the 6th scheduled MSC on 11/10/08, or cut his losses to sign this seemingly 1-sided deal?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
 


LdiJ

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

The facts:

* Marriage of long duration with parties married 05/02/81, agreed upon separation date of 05/01/00, & petition filed by husband on 07/11/05.

* Petitioner, ex-husband, has been providing financial support (ranging from $750-$1400/mo) to Respondent, wife, every month since the separation date of 05/01/00, primarily due to their youngest son living with her until 09/06. Petitioner stopped paying Respondent on 05/01/00 when their youngest son moved out & she obtained a temporary support order in the amount of $1,001/mo, based on his current income that has significantly increased since date of separation.

* Wages at & prior to separation as follows: Petitioner 2000=$77,734, 1999=$50,091, 1998=$7,623, 1997=$30k est., 1996=$32,108, 1995=$28,210. Respondent 2000=$30,695, 1999=$25,851, 1998=$28,939, 1997=$26k est., 1996=$23,650, 1995=$19,830. Petitioner’s income was all self-employment salary, with the exception of 2000, so the exact amount of total income is unclear.

* Marital status was terminated on 08/07/07, but parties are still trying to negotiate a Stipulated Judgment on all other issues. It is agreed, but currently absent a written agreement, that Respondent keeps all community property (approx. value $34.5k) with the exception of Petitioner’s 401k (approx. value $2,300). Respondent would bear approx. $44.7k of community debt, while Petitioner would bear over $232k of community debt. Majority of Petitioner’s debt is due to failed business expenses including taxes & more that must be consolidated.

Both parties have been trying to negotiate on reserved issues for the past couple of years. At first, Respondent wanted lifetime support of $750/mo, despite currently working for the for the USPS for over 14 years, with a salary of over $45k/yr. Respondent is now asking for $550/mo nonmodifiable support for the period of 6 years. Respondent has vowed to return to court every year to modify support if this is not agreed upon. Petitioner wants to finally end this, but is in the construction business as a Civil Engineer & nonmodifiable support doesn’t appear to be an ideal option in this struggling economy. Petitioner has consulted with 2 attorneys in the area that provided different answers. One said this was “fair” since there will be an end in sight & temporary support will be cut in half; the other said actual self-employment income would have to be discovered & since it’s been so long since the date of separation that more weight could be held on current income instead.

Pursuant to California Family Code section 4320: 1) Respondent has maintained a secure position for over 14 years with the USPS & doesn’t need retraining; 2) Respondent did not contribute to Petitioner’s education or training as a Civil Engineer; 3) Marital standard of living was very middle class through out most of the marriage; 4) There are no minor children to consider; 5) Petitioner has several health problems, including diabetes, & both parties are over 50; 5) No history of domestic violence.


1) Despite this being a marriage of long duration, doesn’t the court look down on lifetime support or the supported spouse making no effort of becoming self-supporting?

2) What would be a "fair" spousal support amount & duration under these following conditions?

3) Should Petitioner walk away with nearly all the debt & still have to pay additional spousal support?

4) This case was calendared for trial on 07/07/08, after 4 failed MSC, but Respondent was able to have the trial vacated without Petitioner's knowledge in order to extend her high temporary spousal support. Should Petitioner attempt to take this back to trial again at the 6th scheduled MSC on 11/10/08, or cut his losses to sign this seemingly 1-sided deal?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
The court has already ordered her tmporary support of 1001.00. You were married long enough that support could certainly extend more than 6 years, and there is a slight risk of it being permanent.

My concern would be that if you fight it, you might get stuck with the 1001.00 a month, and possibly for longer than 6 years. Whereas 550.00 cuts that in half, with a specific ending date.

Its your decision to make, and you have to weigh the risks. However, I tend to agree with your attorney.

There is at least one other person here that will tell you to fight it, even if your legal fees end up being way higher than the amount of money that you would save in spousal support. I am more pragmatic than that.
 

Bali Hai

Senior Member
The court has already ordered her tmporary support of 1001.00. You were married long enough that support could certainly extend more than 6 years, and there is a slight risk of it being permanent.

My concern would be that if you fight it, you might get stuck with the 1001.00 a month, and possibly for longer than 6 years. Whereas 550.00 cuts that in half, with a specific ending date.

Its your decision to make, and you have to weigh the risks. However, I tend to agree with your attorney.

There is at least one other person here that will tell you to fight it, even if your legal fees end up being way higher than the amount of money that you would save in spousal support. I am more pragmatic than that.
You didn't answer the OP's questions #2 & 3.

Your pragmatism amounts to paying blackmail protection money to the black hand because it's cheaper than not paying and you won't possibly get your arms and legs broke!!

The overall facts OP has presented here clearly warrants a court battle and appeal if necessary.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
You didn't answer the OP's questions #2 & 3.

Your pragmatism amounts to paying blackmail protection money to the black hand because it's cheaper than not paying and you won't possibly get your arms and legs broke!!

The overall facts OP has presented here clearly warrants a court battle and appeal if necessary.
Of course a court battle and an appeal would likely cost as much, if not more than 550.00 a month for 6 years, and he might very well lose, but who cares about that? Right Bali?:rolleyes:
 

Bali Hai

Senior Member
Of course a court battle and an appeal would likely cost as much, if not more than 550.00 a month for 6 years, and he might very well lose, but who cares about that? Right Bali?:rolleyes:
OP's questions are:

2) What would be a "fair" spousal support amount & duration under these following conditions?

3) Should Petitioner walk away with nearly all the debt & still have to pay additional spousal support?

You didn't answer them so I will:

Question 2: $0 and zero!!
Question 3: NO!

Does the fact that the stbx and her attorney are playing the extortion game make it right, fair or change my answers? NO!!

It's about time you women play your hardball with a FAIR set of RULES!! You've been getting away with Black Hand tactics for long enough!!
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
OP's questions are:

2) What would be a "fair" spousal support amount & duration under these following conditions?

3) Should Petitioner walk away with nearly all the debt & still have to pay additional spousal support?

You didn't answer them so I will:

Question 2: $0 and zero!!
Question 3: NO!

Does the fact that the stbx and her attorney are playing the extortion game make it right, fair or change my answers? NO!!

It's about time you women play your hardball with a FAIR set of RULES!! You've been getting away with Black Hand tactics for long enough!!
Lets make sure that the OP realizes that that is your personal opinion, and has absolutely nothing to do with legal reality.
 

Bali Hai

Senior Member
Lets make sure that the OP realizes that that is your personal opinion, and has absolutely nothing to do with legal reality.
Yes of course, I'll clear that up right now.

The legal reality is that the court can and usually does side with women in divorce cases.

The court has broad discretionary power and uses that power much like the "Black Hand" did in the early 1900's in this country to extort money from men to give to lazy women!!

If the men don't comply, they go to jail!!
 

BSTEPP

Junior Member
The court has already ordered her tmporary support of 1001.00. You were married long enough that support could certainly extend more than 6 years, and there is a slight risk of it being permanent.

My concern would be that if you fight it, you might get stuck with the 1001.00 a month, and possibly for longer than 6 years. Whereas 550.00 cuts that in half, with a specific ending date.

Its your decision to make, and you have to weigh the risks. However, I tend to agree with your attorney.

There is at least one other person here that will tell you to fight it, even if your legal fees end up being way higher than the amount of money that you would save in spousal support. I am more pragmatic than that.
The primary problem with the $1,001 temporary support order is that it is based on income that has nearly doubled since separation. It took a move to Southern CA from the Central Valley in 2004 to secure a management position to obtain the increased income. Also, since the move & due to a previous partner lying to the State Board, my CA PE license has been revoked. Unlicensed Civil Engineers in the area are paid $20-$40k less per year, if they are even able to obtain a position in this economy. Right now our company has drastically downsized & at risk of closing within the next few months. She in now way contributed to the increased income, but yet is able to continue to receive the benefit from it?

I have the same concerns about fighting any longer. Both parties are pro per & merely consulted with a couple of attorneys. I do have an attorney reviewing documents that are submitted to court. This should have been over back in July when I had set up the trial date, but she was able to have the trial vacated on the basis of stating the Petitioner requests a continuance, which was not true. During the 3rd MSC I requested a trial date & it was set for 07/09/08. A 4th MSC was set before the trial & both parties had reached a verbal agreement. I paid to have the papers drawn up & during the 4th MSC requested a continuance before the trial date just in case she didn’t sign. The clerk set up a 5th MSC after the trial date before confirming the date with me. Since it was set after the trial I was told that date could be removed on the day of trial. The trial never happened because the day before she was able to have the date vacated by stating I requested a continuance due to rescheduling the MSC to after the trial date. This was not true & my side was not heard. I immediately filed an Ex Parte to not vacate the trial, which was denied, & the subsequent OSC hearing the judge stated she couldn’t undo the past & I should have been notified of the request to be heard. Sort of stated that the courts messed up by not making sure I was notified, but of course unwilling to rectify the situation on that day.

Support has already been paid to her for 8 ½ years & has exceeded $60k. She has been gainfully employed since 1991; about ½ the duration of marriage. Despite incomes being nearly equal the last 9 years prior to separation high spousal support should continue? What if I sought a reserved jurisdiction with a $0 current amount…what would the likelihood be that she can obtain a high support amount in the future once she quits or retires? Would that be based on current incomes or incomes during the marriage? All my trial documents have been filed, but I would have to represent myself during the trial, which I know is not the best thing to do. I’ve got a lot of concerns about a nonmodifiable order when I’m looking at the real risk of losing my current position within the next 6-months or sooner. What about an agreed upon $550/mo for 6 years that could not be modified up or in duration, but could only be modified downward in this situation? Would a court agree to order something like that?

Thanks.
 

BSTEPP

Junior Member
You didn't answer the OP's questions #2 & 3.

Your pragmatism amounts to paying blackmail protection money to the black hand because it's cheaper than not paying and you won't possibly get your arms and legs broke!!

The overall facts OP has presented here clearly warrants a court battle and appeal if necessary.
That’s what I’m thinking…it’s basically blackmail. This has been going on for so many years that I want it to end, but at what continued costs??? Both parties are in pro per & have consulted with various attorneys on the matter. With the help of an attorney I have filed all the trial documents before the previous trial date back in July that was subsequently vacated by her. What chances would I have in a trial being pro per? I know an appeal would be impossible, but with enough couching from an attorney friend of mine…can a trial be successfully argued in pro per? Currently she doesn’t have an attorney & claims to not have the money to retain one. I’m sure if the case went to trial she would come up with the money somewhere.
 

BSTEPP

Junior Member
Drastic change in income starting next week!!!

The primary problem with the $1,001 temporary support order is that it is based on income that has nearly doubled since separation. It took a move to Southern CA from the Central Valley in 2004 to secure a management position to obtain the increased income. Also, since the move & due to a previous partner lying to the State Board, my CA PE license has been revoked. Unlicensed Civil Engineers in the area are paid $20-$40k less per year, if they are even able to obtain a position in this economy. Right now our company has drastically downsized & at risk of closing within the next few months. She in now way contributed to the increased income, but yet is able to continue to receive the benefit from it?
Well a quick update...today the company DID downsize! 2 more people was let go in a small engineering firm & the work week has been cut to 4 days per week rather than 5. The salary cut will be just under $20k & this decrease begins Monday! How can I quickly request a reduction in the temporary support of $1,001/mo? An OSC takes months to get on the calendar & with no financial reserves...I don't know what I'm going to do. An Ex Parte hearing can't be requested when modifying spousal support...right? Now the previously considered agreement is out of the question, but a lower temporary order is needed this next week. What are the options?

Thanks.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Well a quick update...today the company DID downsize! 2 more people was let go in a small engineering firm & the work week has been cut to 4 days per week rather than 5. The salary cut will be just under $20k & this decrease begins Monday! How can I quickly request a reduction in the temporary support of $1,001/mo? An OSC takes months to get on the calendar & with no financial reserves...I don't know what I'm going to do. An Ex Parte hearing can't be requested when modifying spousal support...right? Now the previously considered agreement is out of the question, but a lower temporary order is needed this next week. What are the options?

Thanks.
Unfortunately there is no way to make it happen fast. You are going to have to file a motion to modify temporary support and provide as much evidence as possible of the involuntary downsizing of your income, as possible, with the motion.

At this point, you may want to let the judge decide regarding any final alimony figures and time periods, rather than continue to try to come to an agreement.

I would be tempted to see what happens with the motion to modify temporary support, to guage the judge's potential reaction, before making a final decision on how to proceed.
 

Bali Hai

Senior Member
Unfortunately there is no way to make it happen fast. You are going to have to file a motion to modify temporary support and provide as much evidence as possible of the involuntary downsizing of your income, as possible, with the motion.

At this point, you may want to let the judge decide regarding any final alimony figures and time periods, rather than continue to try to come to an agreement.

I would be tempted to see what happens with the motion to modify temporary support, to guage the judge's potential reaction, before making a final decision on how to proceed.
That's right. OP needs to dance to the court's whimsical tune!

Why didn't OP's employer need a court modification before proceeding to downsize??
 

BSTEPP

Junior Member
Unfortunately there is no way to make it happen fast. You are going to have to file a motion to modify temporary support and provide as much evidence as possible of the involuntary downsizing of your income, as possible, with the motion.

At this point, you may want to let the judge decide regarding any final alimony figures and time periods, rather than continue to try to come to an agreement.

I would be tempted to see what happens with the motion to modify temporary support, to guage the judge's potential reaction, before making a final decision on how to proceed.
Filing a motion or OSC in Riverside County takes 3-6 months to be put on the calendar, & she has a wage garnishment for her support payments. Typically does the downward modification occur at the time of filing the motion/OSC or later on the hearing day? Is there a way I can have the wage garnishment removed quicker? I'd rather have a couple months of arrearages rather than losing my home & only means of transportation. A sudden $1650/mo drop in pay is something I can't financially afford under this current order.

Nov. 10th is the next MSC (6th or 7th one!) & she has FINALLY been ordered to physically appear in court for this one. The numerous other hearings she has been allowed to appear by phone since she lives 6 hours away. How likely is it that the judge will hear more than if an agreement has finally been reached or not? Can it actually be brought up about the drastic change in income? What about the trial date back in July that she fraudulantly had vacated without my knowledge? The last trial date took 6 months to obtain!

Thank you for you guidance in an ever increasing & complex situation.
 

BSTEPP

Junior Member
That's right. OP needs to dance to the court's whimsical tune!

Why didn't OP's employer need a court modification before proceeding to downsize??
Does the dance EVER end?:eek:

My employer basically said we should be grateful for still having a job. This is the 3rd round of layoffs & terminations...1st time the remaining peoples' pay & hours has been decreased. A sudden 20% decrease in pay does hurt the already thinly stretched financial situation even further. The main one that keeps benefitting in this situation is the greedy ex-wife that doesn't need the support, but says it's owed to her!:p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top