New Member With A Question

[I'mTheFather]

Court orders are to be obeyed by both parties. If the clause was put in not to marry for one year, and the judge signed off on it, then that is exactly what it means. Not holding her to the agreement will only let her think she can flout any court order without impunity. These women think court orders are for men to follow and the court won't hold them responsible for anything. And this is true in many cases. It's time men fight back and try to force the courts to be fair and impartial.

He should have done something when she violated the order previously. He can probably still do something about those violations (depends on the violations).

But this? Don't encourage him.

 

[Bali Hai]

He should have done something when she violated the order previously. He can probably still do something about those violations (depends on the violations).

But this? Don't encourage him.

Then I would say the judge is not doing their job if they let BS unenforceable clauses put in by women to contaminate a legal document.

 

[I'mTheFather]

Then I would say the judge is not doing their job if they let BS unenforceable clauses put in by women to contaminate a legal document.

Fair enough.

 

[Zigner]

Then I would say the judge is not doing their job if they let BS unenforceable clauses put in by women to contaminate a legal document.

So, if it were put in by the man it would be ok?

 

[toto1234]

The other 2 she broke were having alcohol in the home (her idea) and no overnight guests of the opposite sex (her idea). By all accounts the guy she married is a good guy and I honestly don't want to cause trouble but she has been a pain since the divorce (also her idea). When I wanted the girls for father's day (her weekend) I had to pay to move the girls playhouse from her old house to her new one before she would let me have them. When she signed over her rights to the family home and land in the divorce agreement I didn't realize her name was still on the deed to the land until I tried to refinance the home. I had to make out a will (needed one anyway) and have it worded how she wanted before she would sign. There have been more things like these and I was just curious if she tried something like that again would I have this to keep her in check.

 

[I'mTheFather]

That's true. I don't want to cause any drama with her, I just didn't know if there was anything that could be done legally if needed because of this. I gave in on just about everything for the sake of the kids and she has already broken 3 of the clauses she put in the agreement. I haven't called her on these because of the girls.

I would be a lot more concerned if she's violating clauses that apply to the children. Those clauses most likely impact you.

The marriage one, not so much.

 

[Zigner]

The other 2 she broke were having alcohol in the home (her idea) and no overnight guests of the opposite sex (her idea). By all accounts the guy she married is a good guy and I honestly don't want to cause trouble but she has been a pain since the divorce (also her idea). When I wanted the girls for father's day (her weekend) I had to pay to move the girls playhouse from her old house to her new one before she would let me have them.

No, you didn't have to pay to do that. You chose to in order to convince her to allow you a visit on her weekend.

When she signed over her rights to the family home and land in the divorce agreement I didn't realize her name was still on the deed to the land until I tried to refinance the home.

How is that her fault?

I had to make out a will (needed one anyway) and have it worded how she wanted before she would sign.

So? Make a new will now.

There have been more things like these and I was just curious if she tried something like that again would I have this to keep her in check.

If this is the type of "stuff" you have, then you have nothing.

 

[Ladyback1]

well....!
I guess I should have put more petty clauses into my divorce.....
Seriously? No getting married for a year??? And you signed off on it!

Sorry. I am just blown away that that was allowed to stand, or that you allowed that.

 

[toto1234]

well....!
I guess I should have put more petty clauses into my divorce.....
Seriously? No getting married for a year??? And you signed off on it!

Sorry. I am just blown away that that was allowed to stand, or that you allowed that.

It didn't bother me to sign it. I don't want to get married again. I was just trying to keep it a calm as possible.

 

[Ladyback1]

It didn't bother me to sign it. I don't want to get married again. I was just trying to keep it a calm as possible.

I just wanted to keep the divorce as calm as possible too....but there is no way I would have allowed the person I was divorcing to dictate any portion of my personal life.

Oh well, to each his own.

If it was court ordered or mandated, I'm sure you can file contempt charges against her. Except of course, you don't want to cause any drama or issues. So, that's your answer---don't poke the sleeping bear!

 

[Bali Hai]

So, if it were put in by the man it would be ok?

No, of course not. There are some unreasonable males, I question calling them men.

 

[Zigner]

No, of course not. There are some unreasonable males, I question calling them men.

So, you acknowledge that it's not just women who cause all sorts of problems?

 

[Bali Hai]

It didn't bother me to sign it. I don't want to get married again. I was just trying to keep it a calm as possible.

Smart man.

Keep things calm but you don't have to let yourself be steam-rolled by a woman and the system sworn to protect her.

 

[Bali Hai]

So, you acknowledge that it's not just women who cause all sorts of problems?

Women cause all sorts of problems and men who cause some problems.