Divorce null if...

[HHunter]

I am getting pieces answered at a time...

Basics of this question and facts:
Pregnant March 2008:
Divorce Decree official May 2008 in Texas:
Found out pregnant almost 2 mths to the day after decree was final:

From what I have read, technically, "we" did have children in the marriage if the Decree went through before I knew.

So, what happens now? He only took 35% each for my 401, stock and pension. Can he go back and now go and get his full 50% to get me back? Is there anything else he can do to be vindictive?

 

[LdiJ]

I am getting pieces answered at a time...

Basics of this question and facts:
Pregnant March 2008:
Divorce Decree official May 2008 in Texas:
Found out pregnant almost 2 mths to the day after decree was final:

From what I have read, technically, "we" did have children in the marriage if the Decree went through before I knew.

So, what happens now? He only took 35% each for my 401, stock and pension. Can he go back and now go and get his full 50% to get me back? Is there anything else he can do to be vindictive?

Please talk to an attorney in the state where you divorced. I doubt that the divorce is nullified because you found out you were pregnant afterwards.

 

[Silverplum]

I am getting pieces answered at a time...

Don't.

We (and the TOS, IIRC) discourage double posting. There's a good reason, too -- keep all your divorce questions in ONE thread, and ALL of your history/info is there.

You'll get better, more well-rounded legal info that way.

Regardless, stop posting multiple threads every time you think up a new q. Add to your existing thread/s. One for custody, one for divorce, one for CS. That's it.

 

[mistoffolees]

I am getting pieces answered at a time...

Basics of this question and facts:
Pregnant March 2008:
Divorce Decree official May 2008 in Texas:
Found out pregnant almost 2 mths to the day after decree was final:

From what I have read, technically, "we" did have children in the marriage if the Decree went through before I knew.

So, what happens now? He only took 35% each for my 401, stock and pension. Can he go back and now go and get his full 50% to get me back? Is there anything else he can do to be vindictive?

I doubt that it can be reversed. But before you get yourself worked up, think about it from his perspective. Let's say he COULD get it reversed. What would happen?

1. You'd then file for a new divorce, so he wouldn't get you back, anyway. He would, however, have more legal expenses.
2. The number of children will not have a significant (if any) effect on property settlement in most cases (you could, of course, consider it if you negotiated a settlement, but it's not likely to change. And if it DID change, it would be likely to go in the other direction - that is, he'd probably get less rather than more (assuming that you have primary physical custody).
3. He's going to end up paying child support (again, assuming that you have primary physical custody or if you have 50:50 physical custody that his income is higher than yours).

None of those things are certain, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how it would be to his advantage to make an issue of it. If anything, you stand to benefit if he drags it back to court.

 

[HHunter]

mistoffolees - more info...

One of the other posters recommended keeping everything together, so here is more background.

The baby is not his... I was seeing someone before the divorce was finally signed off and he acknowledges he is the father. We were separated since end of November, 2007, after we sold the house.

So, I guess the worst case is, my ex could take me back to court, do the entire divorce again, which could mean:

1. that now he would ask for the full 50% of everything I have up until now, instead of what I was giving him up until last October which was 35%.
2. Make my life hell and not sign the denial of being the father.
3. He would pay more money, have to redo qdros and pay the lawyer more.
4. This would make me have to get a lawyer as well.

This is sickening. He is vindictive and I got 0 from the divorce. He never believed in 401k, savings or stock options. Amazing how fast he was to take what I worked for. Thousands and thousands of dollars. I am making calls now to attorneys, trying ot figure out what to do.

in the long run, it is just money - right.

 

[mistoffolees]

One of the other posters recommended keeping everything together, so here is more background.

The baby is not his... I was seeing someone before the divorce was finally signed off and he acknowledges he is the father. We were separated since end of November, 2007, after we sold the house.

So, I guess the worst case is, my ex could take me back to court, do the entire divorce again, which could mean:

1. that now he would ask for the full 50% of everything I have up until now, instead of what I was giving him up until last October which was 35%.
2. Make my life hell and not sign the denial of being the father.
3. He would pay more money, have to redo qdros and pay the lawyer more.
4. This would make me have to get a lawyer as well.

This is sickening. He is vindictive and I got 0 from the divorce. He never believed in 401k, savings or stock options. Amazing how fast he was to take what I worked for. Thousands and thousands of dollars. I am making calls now to attorneys, trying ot figure out what to do.

in the long run, it is just money - right.

I think you're mistaken. You were married when he became pregnant. You got a divorce when you were pregnant.

If he were somehow to void the divorce (again, I don't know if it's even possible, but hypothetically), then the child would have been born when you were married to him. That would mean that he becomes the legal father by default and pays child support.

He has a great deal to lose in that scenario.

 

[VeronicaLodge]

Divorce Decree official May 2008 in Texas:
Found out pregnant almost 2 mths to the day after decree was final:

it hasnt even been 2 months since the decree was final.

 

[Ohiogal]

I think you're mistaken. You were married when he became pregnant. You got a divorce when you were pregnant.

If he were somehow to void the divorce (again, I don't know if it's even possible, but hypothetically), then the child would have been born when you were married to him. That would mean that he becomes the legal father by default and pays child support.

He has a great deal to lose in that scenario.

He is the father of the child anyway. LEGALLY.

Presumption of Paternity in Context of Marriage [Texas Family Code § 160.204]
(a) A man is presumed to be the father of a child if:

(1) he is married to the mother of the child and the child is born during the marriage;

(2) he is married to the mother of the child and the child is born before the 301st day after the date the marriage is terminated by death, annulment, declaration of invalidity, or divorce;

So guess what? He will owe child support if she asks unless paternity is disestablished.