Verbiage Understanding

[Motomoto]

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

There is a statement in my decree that states the following;

87% of child are expenses incurred on behalf of the minor child by virtue of Plantiffs schooling or education.

This statement is separate from my CS payments, but the way I read it I'm only responsible for the child care payments if my ex is in school. Am I reading this wrong?

 

[LdiJ]

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

There is a statement in my decree that states the following;

87% of child are expenses incurred on behalf of the minor child by virtue of Plantiffs schooling or education.

This statement is separate from my CS payments, but the way I read it I'm only responsible for the child care payments if my ex is in school. Am I reading this wrong?

Ultimately you will end up being responsible for a percentage of daycare costs if your ex is either in school or working. However, that section does reference only school or education.

 

[Motomoto]

Ultimately you will end up being responsible for a percentage of daycare costs if your ex is either in school or working. However, that section does reference only school or education.

So if it doesn't reference employment, is that assumed? Or does the statement stand by itself as written. I want to make sure if challenged, the judge doesn't call me am idiot for not interpreting the intent of the statement.

 

[LdiJ]

So if it doesn't reference employment, is that assumed? Or does the statement stand by itself as written. I want to make sure if challenged, the judge doesn't call me am idiot for not interpreting the intent of the statement.

Well, I don't think that a judge would call you an idiot since the language is clear, but I do think that a judge would immediately order you to pay a percentage of daycare while she is working as well...and might even be annoyed at having to do so.

 

[ecmst12]

Was she not working and ONLY in school when the order was written?

If that's the case and she is now done school and working, you could go back for a recalculation, since her income has changed significantly.

 

[mistoffolees]

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

There is a statement in my decree that states the following;

87% of child are expenses incurred on behalf of the minor child by virtue of Plantiffs schooling or education.

This statement is separate from my CS payments, but the way I read it I'm only responsible for the child care payments if my ex is in school. Am I reading this wrong?

You may be reading it wrong. Who is the plaintiff? And does the plaintiff have a better education than the Respondent?

And please quote the entire sentence - or at least the part before '87%'. It's not clear who is to pay the 87%.

 

[Motomoto]

Was she not working and ONLY in school when the order was written?

If that's the case and she is now done school and working, you could go back for a recalculation, since her income has changed significantly.

She was neither working or in school.

 

[Motomoto]

You may be reading it wrong. Who is the plaintiff? And does the plaintiff have a better education than the Respondent?

And please quote the entire sentence - or at least the part before '87%'. It's not clear who is to pay the 87%.

I am the Defendant and she is the Plaintiff. We split the costs 17%/87% based on the CS calculation. This only refers to Daycare, since Preschool I'd paid out of CS.

 

[ZombieAppetite]

104%... Crazy world

 

[mistoffolees]

I am the Defendant and she is the Plaintiff. We split the costs 17%/87% based on the CS calculation. This only refers to Daycare, since Preschool I'd paid out of CS.

Sorry, I'm not interested in pulling teeth. You're not making any sense because you haven't given all the relevant information.

Please tell us what the entire section says. Word for word, but without the names.

Or don't. Just don't expect any of the advice to be useful, though.

 

[Motomoto]

11 . CHILD CARE CONTRIBUTION: That the parties shall split in
proportion to the Child Support Guidelines, namely Plaintiff 7% and Defendant
83%, of any and all daycare expenses incurred on behalf of the minor child by
virtue of Plaintiffs schooling or education. It shall be the responsibility of the
Plaintiff to notify the Defendant of any daycare expenses incurred and the
Defendant shall remit any said sums directly to the Plaintiff within 7 days from
the date of the notification of the incurred expense.


*Here is the actual verbiage from the decree. Sorry I was operating on my iPhone before.

 

[mistoffolees]

11 . CHILD CARE CONTRIBUTION: That the parties shall split in
proportion to the Child Support Guidelines, namely Plaintiff 7% and Defendant
83%, of any and all daycare expenses incurred on behalf of the minor child by
virtue of Plaintiffs schooling or education. It shall be the responsibility of the
Plaintiff to notify the Defendant of any daycare expenses incurred and the
Defendant shall remit any said sums directly to the Plaintiff within 7 days from
the date of the notification of the incurred expense.


*Here is the actual verbiage from the decree. Sorry I was operating on my iPhone before.

OK. The wording stinks, but it's still pretty clear. If there is a daycare expense that is incurred because of Plaintiff's schooling or education, then plaintiff pays 17% and defendant pays 83%.

What part don't you understand?

Now, if I were Plaintiff, I would have asked for work to be included, but it's not so defendant doesn't have to pay for work-related child care (at least not according to this clause).

 

[Motomoto]

OK. The wording stinks, but it's still pretty clear. If there is a daycare expense that is incurred because of Plaintiff's schooling or education, then plaintiff pays 17% and defendant pays 83%.

What part don't you understand?

Now, if I were Plaintiff, I would have asked for work to be included, but it's not so defendant doesn't have to pay for work-related child care (at least not according to this clause).

I think I'm perfectly clear now. I didn't want this to come back and bite me. Since the Plaintiff's attorney created the brief, then it is his folly to not include work.

Thanks all,
MM

 

[LdiJ]

I think I'm perfectly clear now. I didn't want this to come back and bite me. Since the Plaintiff's attorney created the brief, then it is his folly to not include work.

Thanks all,
MM

Again, though, expect it to get back in front of the judge and expect to be ordered to pay a percentage of daycare costs while she is working as well.