50yo,TOLD to leave,built family biz&prim.caregiver BUTwent to schl& relied on job@biz

[Bali Hai]

Where did you see an indication that OP was in poor health?

Op stated that he has become obese, bald and has high blood pressure since being a SAHP at stbx's insistence.

 

[LdiJ]

Op stated that he has become obese, bald and has high blood pressure since being a SAHP at stbx's insistence.

Come on Bali...that is not a recognized disability. In fact, all he probably needs to do to reduce the blood pressure issues is to improve his diet and lose some weight.

 

[Bali Hai]

Come on Bali...that is not a recognized disability. In fact, all he probably needs to do to reduce the blood pressure issues is to improve his diet and lose some weight.

The successful lawyer wife should pay for his full recovery. It will take as long as it takes.

 

[LdiJ]

The successful lawyer wife should pay for his full recovery. It will take as long as it takes.

I shouldn't be surprised when you make such ridiculous statements, but I always am.

 

[Bali Hai]

I shouldn't be surprised when you make such ridiculous statements, but I always am.

I'll bet you're not as surprised as I was when the judge hit me with life-time alimony. That's what makes me "ridiculous"?? The same "ridiculous" statements used by me now was used by her attorney to convict me to work and pay forever.

Suck it up, what's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

 

[ecmst12]

And again we see your bitterness over your divorce order (which, from what I've heard, you totally made your bed for) causing you to give bad advice to other people. Cut it out.

 

[Doreen]

Despite being a recent law school graduate, OP appears to lack initiative and wherewithal to jump into the area of divorce law that pertains to his case. And would debate the merits of his divorce case with mostly non-attorneys on a public forum who are not from his own state.

OP needs to get himself a good divorce attorney before he makes any decisions about whether to stay or move out, or about anything else that may affect the divorce. If his STBX is a practicing divorce attorney, and if she is any good, she will eat his lunch if he does not lawyer up real soon with a good divorce attorney. Even the best attorneys know their limitations, and retain other attorneys to represent them on matters in which they lack expertise and impartiality.

By far, most men who leave the workforce in their 40's to be primary caregivers for their children do so because it simply makes good sense practically and economically. That due to the fact they are both the lower earning half of the marriage AND either unemployed, underemployed, or for whatever reason unable to earn a high enough wage to offset child care expenses. And the market in recent years has been harsh on some who once earned higher incomes, and which they are unable to regain.

Bottom line is very few if any successfully professional males quit high paying careers for child caring, and it's a good bet that this case is not the exception. Dad just reached a professional dead end, and chose to help raise the children, and later go to law school. If so, the argument of forsaking career for the spouse won't fly very far. Since she actually supported her husband until he finished his law degree, that weakens any argument for his getting long term alimony even more.

It's a sure bet wife will downplay hubby's role in HER business, especially since he never legally had an ownership interest in it. She may paint him as an errand boy, and in which all business decisions were ultimately hers alone. In the end he should be entitled to half the present value of the net equity of that business, and nothing more.

Dad is no longer the primary caregiver, and has not been so for some time.

Going into this divorce, dad should start with the assumption he will come out of the divorce as the NCP, he will need to find other living arrangements, he will pay child support, that he might get some short term support or alimony, and that he will be entitled to half the net $$ equity accrued in their marriage. If he ends up with more, fine and dandy, but at this point he should not be banking on it. But if he does wind up with more, it will be because he has a good attorney, and is not representing himself.

 

[Ohiogal]

Despite being a recent law school graduate, OP appears to lack initiative and wherewithal to jump into the area of divorce law that pertains to his case. And would debate the merits of his divorce case with mostly non-attorneys on a public forum who are not from his own state.

OP needs to get himself a good divorce attorney before he makes any decisions about whether to stay or move out, or about anything else that may affect the divorce. If his STBX is a practicing divorce attorney, and if she is any good, she will eat his lunch if he does not lawyer up real soon with a good divorce attorney. Even the best attorneys know their limitations, and retain other attorneys to represent them on matters in which they lack expertise and impartiality.

By far, most men who leave the workforce in their 40's to be primary caregivers for their children do so because it simply makes good sense practically and economically. That due to the fact they are both the lower earning half of the marriage AND either unemployed, underemployed, or for whatever reason unable to earn a high enough wage to offset child care expenses. And the market in recent years has been harsh on some who once earned higher incomes, and which they are unable to regain.

Bottom line is very few if any successfully professional males quit high paying careers for child caring, and it's a good bet that this case is not the exception. Dad just reached a professional dead end, and chose to help raise the children, and later go to law school. If so, the argument of forsaking career for the spouse won't fly very far. Since she actually supported her husband until he finished his law degree, that weakens any argument for his getting long term alimony even more.

It's a sure bet wife will downplay hubby's role in HER business, especially since he never legally had an ownership interest in it. She may paint him as an errand boy, and in which all business decisions were ultimately hers alone. In the end he should be entitled to half the present value of the net equity of that business, and nothing more.

Dad is no longer the primary caregiver, and has not been so for some time.

Going into this divorce, dad should start with the assumption he will come out of the divorce as the NCP, he will need to find other living arrangements, he will pay child support, that he might get some short term support or alimony, and that he will be entitled to half the net $$ equity accrued in their marriage. If he ends up with more, fine and dandy, but at this point he should not be banking on it. But if he does wind up with more, it will be because he has a good attorney, and is not representing himself.

You are incorrect on the bolded but nice try. He is NOT necessarily entitled to half the present value of the net equity of the business. You can't say that. This is an LLC not a sole proprietorship. How many actual partners are in the LLC? And if she supported him and paid for him, she will most likely be paying him alimony for a limited amount of time.

And he was told to get an attorney a long time back. By me.

 

[Bali Hai]

Despite being a recent law school graduate, OP appears to lack initiative and wherewithal to jump into the area of divorce law that pertains to his case. And would debate the merits of his divorce case with mostly non-attorneys on a public forum who are not from his own state.

OP needs to get himself a good divorce attorney before he makes any decisions about whether to stay or move out, or about anything else that may affect the divorce. If his STBX is a practicing divorce attorney, and if she is any good, she will eat his lunch if he does not lawyer up real soon with a good divorce attorney. Even the best attorneys know their limitations, and retain other attorneys to represent them on matters in which they lack expertise and impartiality.

By far, most men who leave the workforce in their 40's to be primary caregivers for their children do so because it simply makes good sense practically and economically. That due to the fact they are both the lower earning half of the marriage AND either unemployed, underemployed, or for whatever reason unable to earn a high enough wage to offset child care expenses. And the market in recent years has been harsh on some who once earned higher incomes, and which they are unable to regain.

Bottom line is very few if any successfully professional males quit high paying careers for child caring, and it's a good bet that this case is not the exception. Dad just reached a professional dead end, and chose to help raise the children, and later go to law school. If so, the argument of forsaking career for the spouse won't fly very far. Since she actually supported her husband until he finished his law degree, that weakens any argument for his getting long term alimony even more.

It's a sure bet wife will downplay hubby's role in HER business, especially since he never legally had an ownership interest in it. She may paint him as an errand boy, and in which all business decisions were ultimately hers alone. In the end he should be entitled to half the present value of the net equity of that business, and nothing more.

Dad is no longer the primary caregiver, and has not been so for some time.

Going into this divorce, dad should start with the assumption he will come out of the divorce as the NCP, he will need to find other living arrangements, he will pay child support, that he might get some short term support or alimony, and that he will be entitled to half the net $$ equity accrued in their marriage. If he ends up with more, fine and dandy, but at this point he should not be banking on it. But if he does wind up with more, it will be because he has a good attorney, and is not representing himself.

You have truly shown your bias in favor of the wife. Congratulations, you didn't even try to hide it.

 

[stealth2]

You have truly shown your bias in favor of the wife. Congratulations, you didn't even try to hide it.

I have to agree that the quoted post was very slanted. The primary area I take issue with is that OP should simply accept being the NCP. I really don't think this is a given, considering that both parents relied on "au pairs" to care for the children once Dad went back to school. Custody could well be a toss-up, and Dad may actually have an edge. Having said that, Dad WILL need to find a job, so we go back to it being a relative toss-up. How the parents have spent parenting time since Dad stopped being a SAHP will be relevant. As will Dad's ignorance in simply moving at his wife's demand. That told the court that Mom is a fit CP.

Spousal Support? Maybe, maybe not. All of this is a toss-up at this point.

It is also unclear (to me, anyway) WHEN OP got his JD, and whether he has been putting off taking the bar. That he has not done so, while engaging in pro bono work may well figure against him as he has spent time seriously under-employed when he COULD have been making money in his chosen field.

Nothing here is a slam-dunk from either side.

The only thing that's a definite? OP NEEDS a lawyer. I do NOT think he is able to represent himself, especially against his family law attorney wife.

 

[tuffbrk]

Very well said, Stealth! I absolutely believe that alimony is a toss up in this case. Even though he has an education and qualifications, it is a long term marriage so short term, limited duration awards, etc. rarely are even considered. Basically, he has an education but no work experience whatsoever so he will require support. The judge may very easily decide to award alimony, allow it to be modified and then his STBX will have the joy of trying to prove OP's changed circumstances for the rest of her life.

 

[Bali Hai]

And again we see your bitterness over your divorce order (which, from what I've heard, you totally made your bed for) causing you to give bad advice to other people. Cut it out.

Did you hear that from the judge in my case??

 

[ecmst12]

I heard it from people who were here and reading your posts when you were going through the trial.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Op stated that he has become obese, bald and has high blood pressure since being a SAHP at stbx's insistence.

Oh, for criminy sake! None of that is due to being a SAHP - it's called being sedentary and middle aged.

 

[Bali Hai]

I heard it from people who were here and reading your posts when you were going through the trial.

Your sources are confusing me with someone else. My divorce was final in 2001, I didn't join or post anything here on this forum until years later. Perhaps the people you heard it from are clairvoyant?