Cohabitation?

[AlimoMe]

My ex and I both reside in and were divorced in Utah. We were married 16 years. She was awarded $1200 per month alimony for 16 years. That is a lot of money for me. I've been paying that and child support for about 6 years. For the past 2 years, she has been "engaged". But, they have set no date for marriage. He keeps a one-bedroom apartment in Salt Lake City where he works. She lives in the home we used to live in in Richfield, about 160 miles south. He typically spends the weekends living with her and the kids in the house in Richfield. The kids call him step-dad. They have family pictures taken and send them out as Christmas cards. They wear wedding rings (not engagement rings, actual wedding rings). Many people in the community assume they are married. If asked where his primary residence is, they would say in Salt Lake. They are very careful to insist that they are not cohabitating. I'm pretty sure he gets his mail in Salt Lake and keeps most of his stuff in Salt Lake. He probably lives out of a suit case when he is in Richfield. He was recently out of work for a few weeks and spent almost every day in Richfield. They sleep together on Saturday night under the same roof as my kids and then teach my kids in Sunday School on Sunday morning. It drives me crazy. Is a judge likely to rule that this is cohabitation?

[moburkes]

Is common law marriage recognized in your state?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by AlimoMe

My ex and I both reside in and were divorced in Utah. We were married 16 years. She was awarded $1200 per month alimony for 16 years. That is a lot of money for me. I've been paying that and child support for about 6 years. For the past 2 years, she has been "engaged". But, they have set no date for marriage. He keeps a one-bedroom apartment in Salt Lake City where he works. She lives in the home we used to live in in Richfield, about 160 miles south. He typically spends the weekends living with her and the kids in the house in Richfield. The kids call him step-dad. They have family pictures taken and send them out as Christmas cards. They wear wedding rings (not engagement rings, actual wedding rings). Many people in the community assume they are married. If asked where his primary residence is, they would say in Salt Lake. They are very careful to insist that they are not cohabitating. I'm pretty sure he gets his mail in Salt Lake and keeps most of his stuff in Salt Lake. He probably lives out of a suit case when he is in Richfield. He was recently out of work for a few weeks and spent almost every day in Richfield. They sleep together on Saturday night under the same roof as my kids and then teach my kids in Sunday School on Sunday morning. It drives me crazy. Is a judge likely to rule that this is cohabitation?

No, I am sorry, but its not cohabitation. He lives in Salt Lake City, not Richfield. He is a weekend visitor only. Now, if Utah is one of the few states that still recognizes common law marriage you might be able to convince a judge that they are married by common law, but I don't know if Utah recognizes common law marriage, or if it does then whether or not they meet the elements. You might not even have standing to try to assert that they are married by common law.

You really ought to consult a local attorney.

[AlimoMe]

Thank you for your replies. I really appreciate it.

I looked up some information on Common Law Marriage in Utah and found the following:

"Utah: For a common-law marriage, a man and woman must (1) be capable of giving consent and getting married; (2) cohabit; and (3) have a reputation of being husband and wife."

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by AlimoMe

Thank you for your replies. I really appreciate it.

I looked up some information on Common Law Marriage in Utah and found the following:

"Utah: For a common-law marriage, a man and woman must (1) be capable of giving consent and getting married; (2) cohabit; and (3) have a reputation of being husband and wife."

Well, then they don't meet the requirements for a common law marriage, because they are NOT cohabitating. Again, spending the weekends together is NOT cohabitating.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

Well, then they don't meet the requirements for a common law marriage, because they are NOT cohabitating. Again, spending the weekends together is NOT cohabitating.

Whatever.

Do you agree that the living "arrangement" by the ex-wife and her numb nutted lover is voluntarily constructed by both to "get around" the legal aspects in the divorce decree for the sole purpose of keeping this OP paying alimony??

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

Whatever.

Do you agree that the living "arrangement" by the ex-wife and her numb nutted lover is voluntarily constructed by both to "get around" the legal aspects in the divorce decree for the sole purpose of keeping this OP paying alimony??

No, not even remotely.

He works somewhere that is 160 miles away from where she lives. They may have a committed relationship but the absolutely are NOT cohabitating. They are maintaining separate households....and can't even remotely be considered to be playing games.

They certainly aren't shareing household expenses...which is the whole point of cohabitation.

Grow up Bali..

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

No, not even remotely.

He works somewhere that is 160 miles away from where she lives. They may have a committed relationship but the absolutely are NOT cohabitating. They are maintaining separate households....and can't even remotely be considered to be playing games.

They certainly aren't shareing household expenses...which is the whole point of cohabitation.

Grow up Bali..

I believe you should grow up if you can't see this sham. You know, sometimes I question if you are really that iqnorant.

[CJane]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

I believe you should grow up if you can't see this sham. You know, sometimes I question if you are really that iqnorant.

Are you kidding? My BF and I live 15 minutes apart. He spends most Wed nights here, I spend most Thurs-Sat nights there... and we most certainly are NOT co-habbing. Of course, I don't receive alimony, so my motives probably aren't suspect, but COME ON! He lives 2 HOURS from her and maintains a separate residence where he resides 5/7 days. How on Earth is that a 'sham'?

Dude. Your bitterness is becoming idiocy.

[FITFatherof2]

Alimome, this is a longshot, but worth a try. If she has been with this guy for two years and the kids call him their step-father I would check school enrollment records and see if this bozo is listed as a contact for emergencies, or as a person who is able to pick the kids up from school. On most forms they ask to list the relationship to the child. I dont know what kind of proof you need to show they are cohabitating but I would consider hiring a private investigator.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by FITFatherof2

Alimome, this is a longshot, but worth a try. If she has been with this guy for two years and the kids call him their step-father I would check school enrollment records and see if this bozo is listed as a contact for emergencies, or as a person who is able to pick the kids up from school. On most forms they ask to list the relationship to the child. I dont know what kind of proof you need to show they are cohabitating but I would consider hiring a private investigator.

It doesn't matter...they are NOT cohabitating....he would just be wasting his money.

Now, if the kids tell him that the guy has moved in full time, that's a completely different story.

The whole issue of cohabitation is support. If someone is living with someone and supporting that person, then alimony could possibly be stopped. However, someone that is maintaining a separate household, 160 miles away, and living there MOST of the time, clearly isn't supporting the ex's household.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

It doesn't matter...they are NOT cohabitating....he would just be wasting his money.

Now, if the kids tell him that the guy has moved in full time, that's a completely different story.

The whole issue of cohabitation is support. If someone is living with someone and supporting that person, then alimony could possibly be stopped. However, someone that is maintaining a separate household, 160 miles away, and living there MOST of the time, clearly isn't supporting the ex's household.

Maybe and maybe not. Your reluctance and the legal systems reluctance to take a hard look at the matter and hold the ex-wife accountable for this free money she is getting, clearly gives her the upper hand.

Receiviing alimony is no different than receiving welfare and we have done a pretty good job of cleaning up the welfare system in this country by holding people that receive benefits accountable.

[AlimoMe]

I can't say for sure how much monetary support her "fiance" gives her. I know he bought the lawn mower they use at the Richfield residence. I also know that she has a pattern of using men for monetary support. The car she drives is registered in the name of an old boyfriend from the Provo area and he makes payments when she says she can't. The house is now in her father's name because the mortgage company forclosed on it. Some old boyfriend from Delta buys the kids Christmas presents. Her finance objects. But, she tells him there is no way she is going to stop talking to the guy in Delta because she is not going to give up that "resource". She is a money addict. There is never enough and there never will be. Unfortuantly for me, the court is forcing me to enable her.

[moburkes]

This doesn't change the answer. Sorry. By the way, those men cannot be used unless they allow it.

[AlimoMe]

I don't get why, legally, cohabitation is required to end Alimony. I have a friend who lives in Las Vegas during the week while his wife lives in Los Angeles. One of them flies to where the other one is and they spend weekends together. They are one of the happiest married couples I know.