Ending Alimony Payments

[cardinal48]

Resident of MINNESOTA. Divorced in 2000. Court ordered to pay alimony to my ex-wife UNLESS she remarries. For the past 6 years she has been living with a man and they do not plan on getting married SOLELY BECAUSE the alimony payments would stop. They share incomes and all the other benefits of marriage (with the exception of filing jointly on their taxes I 'spose). Am I stuck in this ALIMONY PRISON forever or does MINNESOTA RECOGNIZE a joint domicile existence after so many years? Thank You.

 

[LdiJ]

Resident of MINNESOTA. Divorced in 2000. Court ordered to pay alimony to my ex-wife UNLESS she remarries. For the past 6 years she has been living with a man and they do not plan on getting married SOLELY BECAUSE the alimony payments would stop. They share incomes and all the other benefits of marriage (with the exception of filing jointly on their taxes I 'spose). Am I stuck in this ALIMONY PRISON forever or does MINNESOTA RECOGNIZE a joint domicile existence after so many years? Thank You.

How do you know the reason why they aren't getting married?

 

[Ohiogal]

You can show that they are engaged in a marriage? Without a license? And that the only reason they are NOT getting married is alimony? Can you prove that?

 

[cardinal48]

How do you know the reason why they aren't getting married?

Because I have been told by an acquaintance of hers that she has said "why get married and lose the monthly alimony? We'll just continue to live together and get the extra money."

 

[cardinal48]

You can show that they are engaged in a marriage? Without a license? And that the only reason they are NOT getting married is alimony? Can you prove that?

No, not officially engaged. Can I prove it? It's a she said she said issue. I revert to my original question which simply seeks free legal advice: does Minnesota recognize a joint domicile relationship or existence after so many years (6 years of living together)? Thank You Again.

 

[Bali Hai]

How do you know the reason why they aren't getting married?

LOL!! That's the FIRST time I've ever witnessed you joking here!!!

 

[Bali Hai]

You can show that they are engaged in a marriage? Without a license? And that the only reason they are NOT getting married is alimony? Can you prove that?

As an attorney you know, that the reality of things are not always "PROVABLE" in court!!!

 

[LdiJ]

LOL!! That's the FIRST time I've ever witnessed you joking here!!!

Bali, that isn't a joke. Maybe the boyfriend is just like you and has no intention of ever getting married again.

 

[Ohiogal]

if the court order states until remarriage then it is until she remarries.

 

[tuffbrk]

if the court order states until remarriage then it is until she remarries.

I'm curious though - if it's proven via a PI that the gentleman resides with the Ex each and every day, is it possible to file based on the grounds that she is receiving financial support from another man,without the benefit of marriage, solely to circumvent the spirit of the divorce agreement?

OP - nothing at all in your decree about shared domiciles?! How old is your decree?!

 

[cardinal48]

I'm curious though - if it's proven via a PI that the gentleman resides with the Ex each and every day, is it possible to file based on the grounds that she is receiving financial support from another man,without the benefit of marriage, solely to circumvent the spirit of the divorce agreement?

OP - nothing at all in your decree about shared domiciles?! How old is your decree?!

MY POINT EXACTLY. And unfortunately, no, there is nothing in the decree about shared domiciles. She (and he) are circumventing the spirit of the alimony. I agreed to support HER with my alimony, not them. The decree is 8 years old. Maybe I SHOULD hire a PI to prove their joint domicile BUT if it doesn't matter, then why spend more money for nothing? That's probably rhetorical.

 

[Bali Hai]

Bali, that isn't a joke. Maybe the boyfriend is just like you and has no intention of ever getting married again.

Well I view the b/f's intentions as irrelevant. It's what HER intentions are that counts!!

 

[Bali Hai]

MY POINT EXACTLY. And unfortunately, no, there is nothing in the decree about shared domiciles. She (and he) are circumventing the spirit of the alimony. I agreed to support HER with my alimony, not them. The decree is 8 years old. Maybe I SHOULD hire a PI to prove their joint domicile BUT if it doesn't matter, then why spend more money for nothing? That's probably rhetorical.

I wouldn't waste the money. The court, her lawyer and YOUR lawyer made sure you are going to pay her every dime they can get out you.

There is a saying in the "divorce justice system" that is evidently true for husbands: "The screwing you get is for the screwing you got"!!