Divorce question

[susan knight]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? nh
My husband has a Final Divorce Decree, two years ago, his ex-wife and himself drew up another document - written and reviewed by her lawyer, signed by both parties, her lawyer submitted to the court and signed by the court. One of the stipulations was that there would be no more litigation and child support would not be revisited until May 2010. She breached this contract and brought my husband back to court. The new judge state that this newer agreement was a non-binding agreement. My question is why is this a non-binding agreement if it was signed by the court? If this is a non-binding agreement, then should my husband stop adhering to the this new document and start adhering again to the original divorce decree?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by susan knight

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? nh
My husband has a Final Divorce Decree, two years ago, his ex-wife and himself drew up another document - written and reviewed by her lawyer, signed by both parties, her lawyer submitted to the court and signed by the court. One of the stipulations was that there would be no more litigation and child support would not be revisited until May 2010. She breached this contract and brought my husband back to court. The new judge state that this newer agreement was a non-binding agreement. My question is why is this a non-binding agreement if it was signed by the court? If this is a non-binding agreement, then should my husband stop adhering to the this new document and start adhering again to the original divorce decree?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

I'd probably agree that it was non-binding - you can't really promise "no further litigation" in a custody/child support matter as both are fluid and can be drastically affected by circumstance. What matter is she now raising?

[susan knight]

Originally Posted by Dogmatique

I'd probably agree that it was non-binding - you can't really promise "no further litigation" in a custody/child support matter as both are fluid and can be drastically affected by circumstance. What matter is she now raising?

The new document states alimony ends May 2010. This old decree states my husband is no longer under obligation to pay alimony. Since this new document is "non-binding", can my husband automatically adhere to the original divorce decree and stop paying alimony immediately? Basically, all we are trying to find out is what document is my husband legally bound to?

[susan knight]

Should my husband adhere to his original divorce decree instead of biding by the "non-binding" document? The original divorce decree stated alimony ended a year ago - the non-binding decree states alimony will end in May 2010. What document should my husband follow legally?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by susan knight

Should my husband adhere to his original divorce decree instead of biding by the "non-binding" document? The original divorce decree stated alimony ended a year ago - the non-binding decree states alimony will end in May 2010. What document should my husband follow legally?

Why did your husband agree to continue alimony? Is this a case where he agreed to below guideline child support in exchange for continuing to pay alimony?

[susan knight]

My husband went into this document with his ex-wife in good faith. It was an to attempt to buy us peace - she was bringing us back to court every three months causing an emotional roller coaster. This new document - my husband paid her $10K cash, extended alimony for an additional two years and increased child support to its maximum. The agreement was proposed so his ex-wife would not continually bring us to court. Both parties signed the document, as well as the court. She brought us back to court this past week - asking for additional child support. At the time, the new judge stated this new document was non-binding. So would it be a correct legal move on my husband's part to go back to adhering to the original divorce decree - stopping alimony and decreased child support?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by susan knight

My husband went into this document with his ex-wife in good faith. It was an to attempt to buy us peace - she was bringing us back to court every three months causing an emotional roller coaster. This new document - my husband paid her $10K cash, extended alimony for an additional two years and increased child support to its maximum. The agreement was proposed so his ex-wife would not continually bring us to court. Both parties signed the document, as well as the court. She brought us back to court this past week - asking for additional child support. At the time, the new judge stated this new document was non-binding. So would it be a correct legal move on my husband's part to go back to adhering to the original divorce decree - stopping alimony and decreased child support?

I think that your husband may have misunderstood the judge to some extent. I think that the judge most likely said that the provision that nothing could be taken back to court until 2010 was not binding. Parties can come to agreements regarding child support and alimony, but sometimes portions of agreements cannot be binding if they are not in accordance with the law.

Therefore no, I would not recommend arbitrarily going back to the amounts shown in the original divorce decree.