Great!
what CC is telling you...and you don't seem to be grasping is...that legally, you have to prove it. you have to get a forensic accountant to check dad out, you need dad's employer to tesitfy dad is actually deliberately working less hours for the sole purpose of lowering his support.
GREAT!! thank you so much for the advice.
1) Ok forensic accountant,
2)dad's employer to testify
3)his emails threatening to quit his job to make sure I never saw a penny
4)emails to my son about coming to live with him so he didn't have to pay child support
5) the 12 years of financial history (which I have)
6) the transcript from the last court hearing of him trying to get out of paying the increase - claiming hardship
7) an investigator following up on spending habits
8) any thing else you can think of
oh and I do grasp it. I know legally the burden of proof lies on me, thats why I came here. If I didn't think the burden of proof rested on myself I would have just let it come rolling along and showed up at court . . like the McLane vs McLane case in Texas, however, because I am preparing this is the reason I came here . . .Thank you for giving your advice, do you have any other advice regarding preparing for a voluntary underemployment case? I just want to make sure I prepare and have all my papers in order.
In re K.N.C., 276 S.W.3d at 627; see also Zorilla v. Wahid, 83 S.W.3d 247, 253 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.); DuBois v. DuBois, 956 S.W.2d 607, 610 (Tex.App.-Tyler 1997
In re K.N.C., 276 S.W.3d at 627. Evidence of intent, such as the circumstances of obligor’s education, economic adversities, business reversals, business background, and earning potential, gives rise to an inference of voluntary underemployment. In re P.J.H., 25 S.W.3d at 405-06; see also In re K.N.C., 276 S.W.3d at 627. These factors, however, are not exhaustive. Roosth v. Roosth, 889 S.W.2d 445, 454 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, writ denied); see, e.g., Garner, 200 S.W.3d at 303 (where the trial court considered the gifts and financial support of the obligor’s extended family in determining his net resources).
