Husband abandons wife

[rkdbarb]

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

In California, a husband simply walks out on his wife of over fifty years. His she entitled to some form of spousal support for any amount of time directly following his desertion? If so, what length of time? If not, does the wife have any form of legal recourse?

Thank you,
rkdbarb

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by rkdbarb

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

In California, a husband simply walks out on his wife of over fifty years. His she entitled to some form of spousal support for any amount of time directly following his desertion? If so, what length of time? If not, does the wife have any form of legal recourse?

Thank you,
rkdbarb

The wife is entitled to 1/2 of the community property and is responsible for 1/2 of the community debt.

Whether or not she would be entitled to any alimony depends on their respective incomes.

I am going to assume that they are retired. She would be entitled to 1/2 of any retirement assets and may also be entitled to some alimony, if all of the current income is his, for example.

If she received spousal support, she would like receive it on a permanent basis, until either he or she passed away.

She really need an attorney, ASAP.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by rkdbarb

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

In California, a husband simply walks out on his wife of over fifty years. His she entitled to some form of spousal support for any amount of time directly following his desertion? If so, what length of time? If not, does the wife have any form of legal recourse?

Thank you,
rkdbarb

In your example I will assume that both spouses worked and earned the same amount of income. I will also assume individually they have an equal amount of retirement savings and social security benefit.

Therefore, NO, the wife is not "entitled" to some form of spousal support for any amount of time just because the husband walked out on her.

It's about time people stop thinking that spousal support is a weapon used by women to get revenge on men in a divorce just because it was a marriage of long duration!!

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

In your example I will assume that both spouses worked and earned the same amount of income. I will also assume individually they have an equal amount of retirement savings and social security benefit.

Therefore, NO, the wife is not "entitled" to some form of spousal support for any amount of time just because the husband walked out on her.

It's about time people stop thinking that spousal support is a weapon used by women to get revenge on men in a divorce just because it was a marriage of long duration!!

Bali...grow up

In this scenario the very youngest these people could be is 66, and that is if they married at 16. Its more likely that they are 70+

Don't be a AZZ. Hell, if I wrote the laws nobody would be able to get divorced if they had been married for 50 years. They would be stuck with each other for life.

My dad, that same generation, only ALLOWED my mother to go to work when I was a teenager, and ONLY so that her salary could help pay for college for the 4 of us. If he could have afforded college for us without help she wouldn't have worked. She CHOSE to keep working afterwards because she liked having her own money, but if dad had had his druther's she wouldn't have kept on working. He was consistantly annoyed (not mad) that she couldn't get off work to do whatever he wanted.

Heck...IRA's didn't even become available under law until I was in my early 20's.

So stop employing YOUR standards to a generation that is already in retirement, who came from a totally different place than YOUR generation.

And...when it gets right down to it...you could have divorced your wife many years earlier than you did, and therefore could have had a very different result than you did. (not that you have ever explained your situation here, other than the fact that you are seriously ticked off because you had to divide the marital assets and pay alimony)

[Ohiogal]

Hey LD we have no basis to KNOW that this woman didn't work. She is from California -- she could be an actress. She could someone in the biz. She could have some money. She is young enough to be computer literate and online asking an internet forum so why don't all of us not make assumptions and ask the questions that need asked.

OP:
What are the current incomes?
Are both of you retired?
Either of you employed?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Ohiogal

Hey LD we have no basis to KNOW that this woman didn't work. She is from California -- she could be an actress. She could someone in the biz. She could have some money. She is young enough to be computer literate and online asking an internet forum so why don't all of us not make assumptions and ask the questions that need asked.

OP:
What are the current incomes?
Are both of you retired?
Either of you employed?

I asked those questions before. I was simply responding to Bali's normal drivel.

[>Charlotte<]

Let's not assume OP is the wife and not, say, one of the children. Or even the husband.

[Ohiogal]

Originally Posted by Clt747

Let's not assume OP is the wife and not, say, one of the children. Or even the husband.

Point taken.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

Bali...grow up

In this scenario the very youngest these people could be is 66, and that is if they married at 16. Its more likely that they are 70+

Don't be a AZZ. Hell, if I wrote the laws nobody would be able to get divorced if they had been married for 50 years. They would be stuck with each other for life.

Well people like you have made sure that men get "stuck for life" in far too many cases!!

My dad, that same generation, only ALLOWED my mother to go to work when I was a teenager, and ONLY so that her salary could help pay for college for the 4 of us. If he could have afforded college for us without help she wouldn't have worked. She CHOSE to keep working afterwards because she liked having her own money, but if dad had had his druther's she wouldn't have kept on working. He was consistantly annoyed (not mad) that she couldn't get off work to do whatever he wanted.

And therefore your dad would be "stuck for life" paying alimony because your mom let him walk all over her??

Heck...IRA's didn't even become available under law until I was in my early 20's.

And your point is??

So stop employing YOUR standards to a generation that is already in retirement, who came from a totally different place than YOUR generation.

I'll do that when you stop employing YOUR standards on MY generation!!

And...when it gets right down to it...you could have divorced your wife many years earlier than you did, and therefore could have had a very different result than you did. (not that you have ever explained your situation here, other than the fact that you are seriously ticked off because you had to divide the marital assets and pay alimony)

I'll sum up my original post in this thread:

Women believe they are "owed" alimony in a marriage of "long duration" because that's the screwing he gets for the screwing he got!! And that's nothing more than prostitution!!

[tuffbrk]

I received a few impressions from the original post -

First, I agree with Clt that it seemed as if it was not the woman asking but a child, friend, sibling.

Second, the question was about obtaining alimony "directly after" being abandoned so it is possible that the poster may be asking about pendente lite support until such time as this couple gets to court. I had never heard of the term myself until after I was knee deep into the process.