Alex_Jones
Junior Member
Re:
I would hope the law and the court order are in agreement. Long story short, I wrote the order. I wrote the MSA, passed it by my lawyer, sent it to hers, and everybody including the judge signed off on it. I made sure I had the "out" and it agreed with Indiana law when I wrote it.
I know that in Indiana the finding of emancipation is only one of two conditions that a judge can order termination of CS. The other condition is if he's over 18, working, and not going to school. Residency with custodial parent is not a factor in that equation. IANAL, but it seems this law is written rather poorly and could just as easily say CS stops at 18 unless the child goes to college, to make the law more in line with other states. Perhaps it was written this way to protect a custodial parent from getting stuck with a dead beat child.
When we went through the divorce, we never set foot in a courtroom, and never even physically saw the judge. Everything was done through clerk filings. The MSA was crafted to follow the exact letter of the law regarding all division of property and CS. It had to ,or one of us would have balked and into court we go. But each of us pressed the law as far as we could to get our fair share. We each did our own research, and our lawyers acted more as advisers with us doing the legwork. I got through the whole divorce for around $500 bucks.
So this is why I posted here to begin with. I know she is enrolling him to get his status set as a post secondary education student. She is taking the law up to the very line. Sure, it's an abuse of the post secondary intent, but the way the law is written, it may fly. I am looking for information, possibly a reference to case law, which would indicate that prior rulings found against the single class enrollment ploy to keep CS going. If I can find it, and she can see she would have a slim chance in court, she probably won't contest it, and it is just another mutual clerk filing to end CS. Otherwise, it's a court battle, and I finally get to meet the judge.
Thanks for all the input,
AJ
I would hope the law and the court order are in agreement. Long story short, I wrote the order. I wrote the MSA, passed it by my lawyer, sent it to hers, and everybody including the judge signed off on it. I made sure I had the "out" and it agreed with Indiana law when I wrote it.
I know that in Indiana the finding of emancipation is only one of two conditions that a judge can order termination of CS. The other condition is if he's over 18, working, and not going to school. Residency with custodial parent is not a factor in that equation. IANAL, but it seems this law is written rather poorly and could just as easily say CS stops at 18 unless the child goes to college, to make the law more in line with other states. Perhaps it was written this way to protect a custodial parent from getting stuck with a dead beat child.
When we went through the divorce, we never set foot in a courtroom, and never even physically saw the judge. Everything was done through clerk filings. The MSA was crafted to follow the exact letter of the law regarding all division of property and CS. It had to ,or one of us would have balked and into court we go. But each of us pressed the law as far as we could to get our fair share. We each did our own research, and our lawyers acted more as advisers with us doing the legwork. I got through the whole divorce for around $500 bucks.
So this is why I posted here to begin with. I know she is enrolling him to get his status set as a post secondary education student. She is taking the law up to the very line. Sure, it's an abuse of the post secondary intent, but the way the law is written, it may fly. I am looking for information, possibly a reference to case law, which would indicate that prior rulings found against the single class enrollment ploy to keep CS going. If I can find it, and she can see she would have a slim chance in court, she probably won't contest it, and it is just another mutual clerk filing to end CS. Otherwise, it's a court battle, and I finally get to meet the judge.
Thanks for all the input,
AJ