Divorce

[mistoffolees]

Originally Posted by JETX

Let's be clear on this.... YOU can call alimony anything you want... EXCEPT when it comes to the law. Law is VERY word specific. You file a claim for ALIMONY in Texas... and it will get denied... since Texas doesn't recognize ALIMONY!!

Since I have no intention of filing any forms in Texas over alimony or family maintenance or anything else, for that matter, your distinction is useless.

BTW, By your logic, no one in Texas should be deducting alimony on their Federal taxes as Bali pointed out. Are you counseling everyone in Texas to forego the tax deduction? And are you counseling recipients to not put it onto their tax return?

Why don't you grow up a bit? For purposes of this discussion, there's no real difference between the two. Certainly, your personal attacks are way off base.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by mistoffolees

Since I have no intention of filing any forms in Texas over alimony or family maintenance or anything else, for that matter, your distinction is useless.

BTW, By your logic, no one in Texas should be deducting alimony on their Federal taxes as Bali pointed out. Are you counseling everyone in Texas to forego the tax deduction? And are you counseling recipients to not put it onto their tax return?

Why don't you grow up a bit? For purposes of this discussion, there's no real difference between the two. Certainly, your personal attacks are way off base.

Ditto, Ditto, Ditto.

I will also point out, as a tax professional, that the IRS is perfecty ok with alimony, spousal maintenance or spousal support being deducted as "alimony".

Just because TX calls it "conservatorship" instead of "custody" doesn't change the fact that its "custody" either...its just TX having their own independent way of wording things.

[alanpaulk]

...law is very "word specific." That makes me smile. How exactly does this law thing work? Its like a computer! You can't just talk to it like a person, you have to use certain special language. Even an extra semicolon could crash the whole thing!

Actually in the really early English courts there was a very formal approach taken to pleadings and it was a little bit more like a computer than today. You could lose your whole case because you didn't plead it correctly. Today courts will accept anything that puts the defendant on notice regarding the subject matter of the lawsuit.

So it is a fair possibility that Mr. JETX has wandered out of the wrong century, thus his disdain for our loose language and use of FORUMS. I would just suggest that he stay off the internet entirely for he is bound to run into many other things that will offend his 13th century sensibilities. An erudite gentleman such as he would be better off at the faculty lounge where only other great minds will be dwelling.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by alanpaulk

...law is very "word specific." That makes me smile. How exactly does this law thing work? Its like a computer! You can't just talk to it like a person, you have to use certain special language. Even an extra semicolon could crash the whole thing!

Actually in the really early English courts there was a very formal approach taken to pleadings and it was a little bit more like a computer than today. You could lose your whole case because you didn't plead it correctly. Today courts will accept anything that puts the defendant on notice regarding the subject matter of the lawsuit.

So it is a fair possibility that Mr. JETX has wandered out of the wrong century, thus his disdain for our loose language and use of FORUMS. I would just suggest that he stay off the internet entirely for he is bound to run into many other things that will offend his 13th century sensibilities. An erudite gentleman such as he would be better off at the faculty lounge where only other great minds will be dwelling.

Gosh I do hope you can afford to pay your ghost-writer!

[Imdone1113]

I was hoping to get some info about my questions, but if you all want to argue about who's right and who's wrong, that's ok by me.

[mistoffolees]

Originally Posted by Imdone1113

I was hoping to get some info about my questions, but if you all want to argue about who's right and who's wrong, that's ok by me.

You already got the answers to your questions - in just the first couple of posts.

[vijendrasnv]

I think at the time of divorce all these issues are discussed.
The culprit person has to give the money or some expenses to her wife and children for future but all these matter must be decided in divorce and this is your right.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by vijendrasnv

I think at the time of divorce all these issues are discussed.
The culprit person has to give the money or some expenses to her wife and children for future but all these matter must be decided in divorce and this is your right.

Please brush up on your English language skills - your posts are often very difficult to parse and may actually end up confusing the original poster. It's great that you want to help people but we've all got to be very clear in what we're trying to get across.

[mistoffolees]

Originally Posted by vijendrasnv

I think at the time of divorce all these issues are discussed.
The culprit person has to give the money or some expenses to her wife and children for future but all these matter must be decided in divorce and this is your right.

The 'culprit person' has to give money to HER wife?

I think you're confused. Maybe you should wait until you know what you're talking about before giving advice.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by mistoffolees

The 'culprit person' has to give money to HER wife?

I think you're confused. Maybe you should wait until you know what you're talking about before giving advice.

English isn't poster's first language...

[>Charlotte<]

Originally Posted by Dogmatique

English isn't poster's first language...

Neither is reasonable thought his first instinct.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by >Charlotte<

Neither is reasonable thought his first instinct.

Touché!

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by >Charlotte<

Neither is reasonable thought his first instinct.

HIS first instinct? I think the poster is female and blind drunk.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

HIS first instinct? I think the poster is female and blind drunk.

OP may indeed be one or both of those...but the poster to whom I was referring is apparently male and simply a non-English speaker..

[>Charlotte<]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

HIS first instinct? I think the poster is female and blind drunk.

When referring to a non-specific sex, "he" is appropriate.

And if that's the case, he's been drunk for a solid week.