M
marlee
Guest
Is there really any "law" in Pennsylvania Divorce cases? Is there any way to rein in the "out of control attorneys" who are trying to destroy the people they are suppose to represent? I'm sure we have some very reliable attorneys in this state, but my question is: When consulting an attorney and he quotes a state law and says this is the way it is and it sounds like we have a good case, but then we go in front of a divorce master who decides otherwise, and the judge supports his decision, what happened to that law? Did it just get changed because the divorce master has a different opinion?
Case in point - Pa State Law supposedly says that when arguing for pre-marital property that the wife is entitled only to a certain percentage of the asset's growth from date of marriage to date of separation. However, in this case she got 70% of everything including all pre-marital property.
His net worth was blown out of proportion while her net worth was listed as zero - even though she owns three properties (now four), and he now owns none. She has income from rental property and thousands of dollars of inheritance money, plus spousal support and claims she has no money. They both have business, neither of which is currently making any money. His retirement annuities are now 70% hers while she "blew" her retirement annuities because she refused to get a real job but instead opened a business that makes no money. He has had to support her and her business at a great loss of money to his own business.
Case in point - Pa State Law supposedly says that when arguing for pre-marital property that the wife is entitled only to a certain percentage of the asset's growth from date of marriage to date of separation. However, in this case she got 70% of everything including all pre-marital property.
His net worth was blown out of proportion while her net worth was listed as zero - even though she owns three properties (now four), and he now owns none. She has income from rental property and thousands of dollars of inheritance money, plus spousal support and claims she has no money. They both have business, neither of which is currently making any money. His retirement annuities are now 70% hers while she "blew" her retirement annuities because she refused to get a real job but instead opened a business that makes no money. He has had to support her and her business at a great loss of money to his own business.