Ex lied during negotiations

[KSFF]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Kansas

If my wife withheld information from me - that she was pregnant by another man and had been cheating when she left - can that be cause to change the property division agreement? Had I known she had cheated on me, I would not have offered the division on the house value I did.

I feel like she lied by omission. At the very least, I would have insisted that she change her name.

 

[Perky]

I'm really not sure, but I doubt that the property division can be changed.

One thing you may want to check into is disestablishing your paternity of the child. If the child is/was born within 300 days after your divorce, then legally you are the father, and your ex can file for support.

 

[nextwife]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Kansas

If my wife withheld information from me - that she was pregnant by another man and had been cheating when she left - can that be cause to change the property division agreement? Had I known she had cheated on me, I would not have offered the division on the house value I did.

I feel like she lied by omission. At the very least, I would have insisted that she change her name.

Being pregnant is a huge falsehood. The divorce should never have occurred while she was pregnant. I'd work on having the decree set aside. A divorce would not have been granted had she NOT lied.

 

[Ohiogal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Kansas

If my wife withheld information from me - that she was pregnant by another man and had been cheating when she left - can that be cause to change the property division agreement? Had I known she had cheated on me, I would not have offered the division on the house value I did.

I feel like she lied by omission. At the very least, I would have insisted that she change her name.

You COULD NOT HAVE INSISTED that she change HER name. That name was hers. Don't care if it was YOURS first, she does not have to change it nor can you force her to change it.
How long after she got divorced did she give birth? And are you CERTAIN that you are not biologically the father?

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Kansas

If my wife withheld information from me - that she was pregnant by another man and had been cheating when she left - can that be cause to change the property division agreement? Had I known she had cheated on me, I would not have offered the division on the house value I did.

I feel like she lied by omission. At the very least, I would have insisted that she change her name.

I addition to the comments from the others, I will add that if your property settlement was a fair 50/50 division of assets, the fact that she cheated on you really wouldn't give you any leverage to change that.

 

[mistoffolees]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Kansas

If my wife withheld information from me - that she was pregnant by another man and had been cheating when she left - can that be cause to change the property division agreement? Had I known she had cheated on me, I would not have offered the division on the house value I did.

I feel like she lied by omission. At the very least, I would have insisted that she change her name.

As you've been told, you can't insist that she change her name.

There are a couple of issues here:

1. As someone else suggested, you could ask for the divorce to be set aside, but I'm not sure why you'd want to to do that. Then you'd still be married to her and have to go through the entire process all over again. The cost of doing so is likely to exceed any possible savings.

2. Kansas is an equitable distribution state. That means that the judge doesn't have to allocate property 50:50, but can change the percentage based on a number of factors (Divorce in Kansas). One of them is simply a free-for-all clause that says the judge can make any changes to be fair if he so chooses. So, in principle, the property distribution could be changed, but in order to do so, you'd have to go back to court and point out that she was pregnant - in which case the judge might void the divorce decree - and you'd be back where you started. I'd ask your attorney, but I doubt if the property settlement would change a lot.

3. The larger factor hasn't been addressed. If she had admitted her pregnancy, you wouldn't have been able to get a divorce until after the baby was born and you'd be the legal father - paying child support for 18+ years unless you went back to court to dis-establish paternity. Even as it is, you really need to talk with your attorney. I know that if the baby were born while you were married, it's legally yours. I'm not sure whether it's legally yours because it was conceived during your marriage. You need to speak with your attorney immediately to see if you have to take action to ensure that you're not the legal father.

 

[Perky]

3. The larger factor hasn't been addressed. If she had admitted her pregnancy, you wouldn't have been able to get a divorce until after the baby was born and you'd be the legal father - paying child support for 18+ years unless you went back to court to dis-establish paternity. Even as it is, you really need to talk with your attorney. I know that if the baby were born while you were married, it's legally yours. I'm not sure whether it's legally yours because it was conceived during your marriage. You need to speak with your attorney immediately to see if you have to take action to ensure that you're not the legal father.

Actually, this factor was addressed, just not by the OP. In Kansas, if the child was born within 300 days after the divorce, the child is his. If she was pregnant at the time of divorce, then she would have been WAY overdue if she delivered after 300 days!

KS Statutes: Ch 38 Article 11: Determination Of Parentage
38-1114: Presumption of paternity. (a) A man is presumed to be the father of a child if:
(1) The man and the child's mother are, or have been, married to each other and the child is born during the marriage or within 300 days after the marriage is terminated by death or by the filing of a journal entry of a decree of annulment or divorce.

 

[mistoffolees]

Actually, this factor was addressed, just not by the OP. In Kansas, if the child was born within 300 days after the divorce, the child is his. If she was pregnant at the time of divorce, then she would have been WAY overdue if she delivered after 300 days!

My comment was that it hadn't been addressed in this thread. I'm glad you had that info.

 

[Perky]

My comment was that it hadn't been addressed in this thread. I'm glad you had that info.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean, but it was addressed in the second post of this thread.

 

[mistoffolees]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean, but it was addressed in the second post of this thread.

You're right - I missed it. My bad.

 

[KSFF]

Sounds like I'd better leave it alone. She left on July 4th, the divorce was final on 22 NOV. She's due in April. I know I'm not the father, as I had a vasectomy 3 years ago and was tested afterward to make sure it did the job.

Thanks for the advice.

 

[Perky]

I know I'm not the father, as I had a vasectomy 3 years ago and was tested afterward to make sure it did the job.

That's not really the point. Under KS law, you are the legal father of that child until you disestablish paternity. Consequently, she can file for child support from you. Or, if she applies for any state aid for the child, then CSE will be looking for you. You should look into disestablishing paternity.

I don't know if the situation changes if her boyfriend signs the AOP. Hopefully, someone else will address that.

 

[mistoffolees]

Sounds like I'd better leave it alone. She left on July 4th, the divorce was final on 22 NOV. She's due in April. I know I'm not the father, as I had a vasectomy 3 years ago and was tested afterward to make sure it did the job.

Thanks for the advice.

Two problems with that logic:

1. Vasectomies sometimes reverse themselves.

2. Even if you're not the biological father, you're the legal father until you take the legal steps to disestablish paternity.

 

[LdiJ]

Two problems with that logic:

1. Vasectomies sometimes reverse themselves.

2. Even if you're not the biological father, you're the legal father until you take the legal steps to disestablish paternity.

Unless someone else signed the AOP at the hospital. In that case he would not be the legal father, but would rather be able to attempt to assert paternity.

I know that others will state that is not correct, but the bottom line is that he will never be connected to the child if someone else signed the AOP and no child was mentioned in the divorce.

However, I think that he does need to file to establish paternity. Based on his timeline, there is a chance that he could be the father of the child.

 

[mistoffolees]

Unless someone else signed the AOP at the hospital. In that case he would not be the legal father, but would rather be able to attempt to assert paternity.

I know that others will state that is not correct, but the bottom line is that he will never be connected to the child if someone else signed the AOP and no child was mentioned in the divorce.

That's not what the law says. It was provided previously in this thread:
"KS Statutes: Ch 38 Article 11: Determination Of Parentage
38-1114: Presumption of paternity. (a) A man is presumed to be the father of a child if:
(1) The man and the child's mother are, or have been, married to each other and the child is born during the marriage or within 300 days after the marriage is terminated by death or by the filing of a journal entry of a decree of annulment or divorce."

Under the law, he is presumed to be the father if the child is born within 300 days after he files for divorce.

Granted, he might never get caught, but if he does nothing, she could go back and ask for child support (including back support and interest) at any time in the future. He needs to disestablish paternity from the start.