divorce and property & alimony

[albanyhigh1978]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? We both are residents of California. However, he retired and we moved to KY 2 years ago. "We" were supposed to move back to California; however, I was dropped off and he went to Florida to visit with his 34 year old daughter (who hates me) and had an affair. His daughter is a long-time marijunna smoker and my husband sounds out of his mind (he does drink). He phoned me after being with "some women" for 2 days without contact we me, to let me know he was not returning to California. After the house sold in KY he was going to pay off some bills and move to Florida to live with his daughter. I'm unemployed at the present as moved back to California and reinstatement with the State has been difficult. He is spending $$ in Florida (he gets retirement, stocks and ??). I don't know what my rights are in terms of support and part of the dollars from the sell of the KY property.

Thank you

 

[nextwife]

How long were you married before the seperation?

Was the house a premarital asset? Were marital funds used to make payments? Did he sell marital assets or premarital assets?

 

[mistoffolees]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? We both are residents of California. However, he retired and we moved to KY 2 years ago. "We" were supposed to move back to California; however, I was dropped off and he went to Florida to visit with his 34 year old daughter (who hates me) and had an affair. His daughter is a long-time marijunna smoker and my husband sounds out of his mind (he does drink). He phoned me after being with "some women" for 2 days without contact we me, to let me know he was not returning to California. After the house sold in KY he was going to pay off some bills and move to Florida to live with his daughter. I'm unemployed at the present as moved back to California and reinstatement with the State has been difficult. He is spending $$ in Florida (he gets retirement, stocks and ??). I don't know what my rights are in terms of support and part of the dollars from the sell of the KY property.

Thank you

In general, you're going to be entitled to half of the marital value of the assets. You're going to have to answer the questions the previous poster asked for anyone to be more specific on what that entails. Depending on the number of years you were married, you may get alimony, too. In most of the country, you need to be married about 10 years to get much alimony. In CA, I believe it's about 1 year for every 2-3 you were married for less than a 10 year marriage and could be more for a long term marriage. There are 14 factors considered in CA in determining alimony, including earnings and earning ability, so it's not a given. In your circumstances, you're likely to at least get temporary support. Depending on age and how long you were married, you may also get social security. However, that all begs the question. From what you described, you can not yet file in CA since you haven't been there long enough to establish residency.

I'd suggest that you talk with an attorney about your options. It may be better for you to delay until you establish residency in CA or you may want to file in KY.

If you want better guidance on what you're entitled to, you'll need to give ages, length of marriage, relative income levels, assets, and so on.

 

[MFinancier]

Talk to an attorney right away, and do a little financial analysis. The cutoff date for marital finances is different in each state you have mentioned. KY is date of decree, FL is date of filing, and CA is date of separation. If your STBX is a net money maker (has substantial income) and is not running up the debt...you may want to file in KY. KY is also an equitable division state and even though conduct isn't supposed to make any difference in the finances...it just might to some judge in KY (In CA...forget it). If you file in KY...he should be responsible for any debt you incur for normal living expenses prior to your divorce as well. If you think he's a net loser and running up alot of debt...CA could be your best bet because income and debt is generally separate after your separation. The down side is you'll be responsible for any of your own debt after your separation. It's time to put your thinking cap on...this is an important decision.

 

[mistoffolees]

Talk to an attorney right away, and do a little financial analysis. The cutoff date for marital finances is different in each state you have mentioned. KY is date of decree, FL is date of filing, and CA is date of separation. If your STBX is a net money maker (has substantial income) and is not running up the debt...you may want to file in KY. KY is also an equitable division state and even though conduct isn't supposed to make any difference in the finances...it just might to some judge in KY (In CA...forget it). If you file in KY...he should be responsible for any debt you incur for normal living expenses prior to your divorce as well. If you think he's a net loser and running up alot of debt...CA could be your best bet because income and debt is generally separate after your separation. The down side is you'll be responsible for any of your own debt after your separation. It's time to put your thinking cap on...this is an important decision.

Other factors need to be considered, as well. For example, if they've been married under 10 years, it's apparently easier to get alimony in CA than in KY. Also, permanent alimony seems to be possible in CA, but may or may not be in KY.

Ideally, she should speak to an attorney in each of the states - or an attorney who knows the situation in the different states (which isn't very likely, I would think).

Depending on what level of assets they're talking about, it may be worth talking with a financial planner, as well.

 

[Bali Hai]

Other factors need to be considered, as well. For example, if they've been married under 10 years, it's apparently easier to get alimony in CA than in KY. Also, permanent alimony seems to be possible in CA, but may or may not be in KY.

Yes, it can be somewhat complicated. She has an unknown work history that may well put her in a position to PAY alimony.

If this is indeed the fact, I'm sure she would choose the state likely to award alimony over the other.

 

[mistoffolees]

Yes, it can be somewhat complicated. She has an unknown work history that may well put her in a position to PAY alimony.

If this is indeed the fact, I'm sure she would choose the state likely to award alimony over the other.

"I'm unemployed at the present as moved back to California and reinstatement with the State has been difficult."

She is currently unemployed and worked for the state. It's not very likely that she has a skilled enough job to be imputed a high income.

And she's going to choose what's best for her just as her husband will choose what's best for him. That's the way the system works. If she files first, she has some control over the situation and therefore a slight advantage (in venue if nothing else). That's life. If you don't like the system, you're free to move to Antarctica.

 

[Bali Hai]

"I'm unemployed at the present as moved back to California and reinstatement with the State has been difficult."

She is currently unemployed and worked for the state. It's not very likely that she has a skilled enough job to be imputed a high income.

And she's going to choose what's best for her just as her husband will choose what's best for him. That's the way the system works. If she files first, she has some control over the situation and therefore a slight advantage (in venue if nothing else). That's life. If you don't like the system, you're free to move to Antarctica.

I heard Bush make a remark along the same lines last night when he defended using MY money to bail out out of control big business.

You must be a Republican because you obviously don't have a second thought about using "the system" to steal other peoples money!!

Furthermore, "the system" can be changed and will be changed eventually and you may find yourself in Antarctica defending female penquins!!

 

[mistoffolees]

You must be a Republican because you obviously don't have a second thought about using "the system" to steal other peoples money!!

Nope. I've been Independent since I registered to vote.

You don't have much of a track record for accuracy, do you?