monetary sanctions...

[Ohiogal]

Ant??? Did someone say Ant???? I've got the Raid???

Does this qualify for a quidditch too?

I am the only Quidditch player at this point hon. But I can pick my team. And yes it does. There are many ants however running around. Raid is necessary.

 

[Grayson]

Actually, I've shown no such thing. You're assuming, and that is your prerogative. Now, the facts are that yes, he should keep paying until our children are both out of college. That's the law

California Age of Majority: when child support payments can be stopped.

18 years except an unmarried child who has attained the age of 18 years, is a full-time high school student, and who is not self-supporting, is considered a minor until the time the child completes the 12th grade or attains the age of 19 years, whichever occurs first.

Statutory cite or civil code reference for the age of majority?

Family Code section 3901.

By the way, how are the Scabies going?

**Shudders**

 

[sotiredofit]

I think the court case below shows that I should not necessarily be imputed a high income just because I have two degrees. As I have stated, I have no experience yet, and have not been able to secure a position in my field. During our ten-year marriage, I was a stay-at-home mom. After the divorce and up to the present, I have only worked part-time and sporadically. See below:


"Husband and wife had been married for thirty years. Wife filed for divorce when she was 54; husband was 56 and was a physician employed full time by UCLA. Husband received additional income from speaking engagements, writings and honoraria. Wife filed an order to show cause (OSC) for spousal support. At issue were husband's consultation fees for treatment of a Saudi Arabian head of state, who husband travelled to see once a year.

Wife was a registered nurse and had an MS and PhD in nursing and child development. She worked as a head nurse and research coordinator at UCLA and had been on the faculty of the UCLA School of Nursing. After her children were born, she focused on raising the family and worked only part-time for the past twenty years. She is currently unemployed.

Wife claims that husband makes $266,000 per year for his house calls to Saudi Arabia. Husband claims that the house calls are sporadic and are now limited to a maximum of $140,000 per year. Further, the patient will soon die, and the visits will cease.

The family trial court found that husband's income approximated $54,000 per month; no income was imputed to wife. The court ordered husband to pay $21,000 in spousal support."[/QUOTE]


She only worked part time for the past twenty years and was currently unemployed and she had received her degrees MANY years ago> NOT just recently. Also she was 54 years old at the end of the marriage. AND this was in determining SPOUSAL support. Which again you are confusing the issue and revealing that you are trying to substitute child support for SPOUSAL support.

Doesn't matter if her degrees were received recently, she has a PHD and a nursing degree. She is still employable, even at 54. I don't see why a person in the same situation, except for being younger, should be imputed income towards CS if they weren't imputed income towards SS. But, of course, you're the lawyer, OHiogal...

 

[sotiredofit]

Wrong. *Actually he has them more than 5% of the time based on your other post:Every other weekend is 52 nights a year. Four to six weeks is anywhere from 28 to 42 days. Simple math -- not including holidays -- says he sees them at the minimum based on your own post 80 days. Which equates to* almost 22% of the time. That is minimum. So you can't add. And you are wrong about the amount of time but however you want to fudge the numbers or lie is up to you. Of course then you turn around an add:
So what is the truth?

Ohiogal, I've never lied. The custody agreements says ex is to take the kids for 5 hours one night a week and 48 hours (2 days) ever other weekend. He has only been seeing them for 24 hours (1 day) every other weekend, which equates to 2 days out of the friggin' month. Some holidays and about 6 weeks during a 3 month summer. Now you do the math...

And he may have been laid off quite frankly which may be why is long term disability ended if it was private insurance through his company. Lots of mortgage companies have declared bankruptcy and have resorted to mass layoffs.

*

He could have been laid off. I'll give you that, but I don't think he was. However, we shall see what those disability records state. Should be interesting. He filed the OSC, so I'll have to show up and see why he was cut off. That will determine which knife I throw next, so to speak.

Nope. The point is YOU WANT MONEY. He doesn't have to pay through college. He will not necessarily be imputed to 155k a year. He is working and therefore he is making the best of the situation. You are just peeved because he wants it lowered.And just to remind everyone what happened from her perspective with her ex:This is after she showed up two hours late to exchange the children. Classy huh? A real sweet ant.

Making the best of his situation? Hardly. If he was, he would be out pounding the pavement looking for another high paying job that he has experience in and he's good at. Not going into his own business, a very physically demanding business I might add, that he expects to earn between 2-3k per month.

 

[Grayson]

I find it a little ironic that you would referr to a story where in the END of it, the husband files to have the support lowered due to the fact that his work with the patient is over, and at which is granted.

Wouldn't that ring a bell for you?

 

[profmum]

Doesn't matter if her degrees were received recently, she has a PHD and a nursing degree. She is still employable, even at 54. I don't see why a person in the same situation, except for being younger, should be imputed income towards CS if they weren't imputed income towards SS. But, of course, you're the lawyer, OHiogal...

I will give my last 0.02 here.. you seem to think that the imputation of income is a guaranteed outcome, ie, the courts will impute Dad's income to be higher than what he claims and yours to be lower than what you are capable of. That is where you will get into trouble, it comes down to the law and perception. Your approach on this forum, (which could very well translate into court) is a" money grubbing, greedy, wanting the x to pay for leaving you" mentality.. that is not a personal attack, but that is exactly how you come across. You cite all these cases where women have been awarded monetary sanctions or spousal support etc, with the feeling that this is exactly how your case will play out.. the example you cited about the 54 yr old, well she was married for 30 years.. you for ten years and your excuse that you cannot be imputed a higher income because you can't get a job makes little sense, when you are telling x he cannot do the same, ie, x cannot be imputed a lower income because he was on disability.. can't have it both ways. I am done with my response here, but tread carefully, otherwise you will end up losing much more than you are trying to gain.

 

[SingleAZdad]

Tired - in all fairness, the housing industry is in real trouble these days. I wouldn't expect your X to be able to earn the same amount in that industry today. Housing sales are slow for some time now and it sounds like the last time he worked as a mortgage broker was 3-4 years ago when the whole industry was going gangbusters. It's just not a reasonable/realistic expectation.

 

[sotiredofit]

Thanks, profmum. I will try to be careful. I just got a bit more info from the ex tonight, folks. According to him, he's now looking for work because he has no other choice. He's not appealing disability because according to him "I can't fight these people". He's also not applying for state disability. So much for being disabled.

My consulting attorney says the onus of proof is on the ex to prove his case, so all I have to do now is keep my mouth shut and it's Christmas.

 

[sotiredofit]

Tired - in all fairness, the housing industry is in real trouble these days. I wouldn't expect your X to be able to earn the same amount in that industry today. Housing sales are slow for some time now and it sounds like the last time he worked as a mortgage broker was 3-4 years ago when the whole industry was going gangbusters. It's just not a reasonable/realistic expectation.

Well, Singledad, agreed, but you have to understand my ex was one of the top guys at his company. He got better and better and the last year worked was representative of his overall skills. But, I do agree about the slowness of the mortgage industry. If he is even imputed half of that amount, I would be happy.

What do you think is realistic/reasonable?

 

[SingleAZdad]

What do you think is realistic/reasonable?

You can do a search for low/median/high compensation by job title. There are a few web sites that help people negotiate what they are worth in their industry. The sites take into account years experience and the like. You can start with a google search for "mortgage broker average income". It'll direct you to several sites.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

the mortgage brokers that I know (3 of 'em) are very very hungry these days. They've told me that their income is about 1/4th of what they were making. Between a soft housing market and the tightening of mortgage criteria, many fewer folks are qualifying for mortgages.

 

[sotiredofit]

GinnyJ, my ex isn't a mortgage broker; he's a mortgage "loan officer". He can help people who are stuck in arms, negative-amortization and other undesirable loan products refinance to more affordable fixed rates. Anytime someone refinances, he can make money. Of course he makes money on new loans as well.

 

[Eekamouse]

Regardless of how your case turns out, I hope you get your children into counselling to deal with the trauma they suffered when you physically attacked your ex and his new wife.

 

[sotiredofit]

Well, I'm pretty sure that I can't get sanctions because we had a marital stipulation. I'm pretty sure most of you on here already knew that though...