Pet Support in California???

[lass]

What is the name of your state? California

Hi, I'm in the process of separating at husbands request. No kids, Married 10 years and lived together (sharing mortgages, bank accounts etc..) for 12years before that. Husband is self-employed and I have worked with him for 21 years and presently work part time with him doing the books etc.. We live in a rural property and have lots of animals. Question - do judges award support payments to animals? Will I get support? How can I collect it, given that my soon to be ex controls the amount of money he makes? He does not want to involve lawyers and I think will get nasty if I engage one. There really isn't a lot of money around (as he works very little) and I don't want to bankrupt him, but equally, I need time to sort myself out, maybe train for a good job rather than jumping into whatecver I can get as soon as possible. Any suggestions much appreciated. At the moment I feel like he's got me over a barrel

 

[dorenephilpot]

I sincerely doubt that any judge on the planet would order "pet support."

But if you DO get some kind of spousal support, how you spend that money is your call.

So, you can take that money and use it to support the assortment of critters.

Hope this information helps!

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

"The Ballad of Jed Clampett" by Paul Henning

Come and listen to a story about a man named Jed
A poor mountaineer, barely kept his family fed,
Then one day he was shootin at some food,
And up through the ground came a bubblin crude.

Oil that is, black gold, Texas tea.

Well the first thing you know ol Jed's a millionaire,
Kinfolk said "Jed move away from there"
Said "Californy is the place you ought to be"
So they loaded up the truck and moved to Beverly.

Hills, that is. Swimmin pools, movie stars.

 

[lass]

I thank you for taking the trouble to reply gentleman, although I did not much appreciate the LaLa humour. One needn't be a hillbilly to appreciate and enjoy animals.
Why aren't pets entitled to support? After all they've been our kids and they need more protection than children do, given that there are the likes of IAAL's around .

 

[stephenk]

Recently, in L.A., a judge ordered that a lab retriever would be the joint custody of a couple that were divorcing. The hubby had weekend visitation of the dog. But no support payments were ordered because the wife was insisting on keeping the dog and did not want hubby to have it.

Animals, unlike children, can be given away. If after your divorce you find you are unable to support 10 cats, 5 dogs, a goldfish and a gecko, then you need to either budget better and give up other things or give some of the pets away.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

I thank you for taking the trouble to reply gentleman, although I did not much appreciate the LaLa humour. One needn't be a hillbilly to appreciate and enjoy animals.
Why aren't pets entitled to support? After all they've been our kids and they need more protection than children do, given that there are the likes of IAAL's around .

My response:

Oh, please . . .

Get off your "high horse" (or dog, chickens, gecko lizards, etc.), will you?

Here, I'll teach you something about California law - -

Animals are "personal property", like your television set, your shoes, your car, and whatever else. They are not "human", and the law does not consider animals to have "human attributes" or the protections of humans, under Civil law.

Like Stephen said, above, dogs and other animals can be divided up between the parties, like any other property, but the court is without jurisdiction to award "support" simply due to the fact that the Legislature hasn't passed a law allowing monetary support for animals.

IAAL

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Let me give you another analogy - -

I think you'll agree that there are some people who are absolutely crazy about cars, and even going so far as to "name" them. You'll agree that these people are what we call "fanatics."

Using your logic, a divorcing couple own a 1972 Dodge "Super Bird" - - a very rare, and valuable, sports car - - valued somewhere in the neighborhood of $75,000 and more.

According to your logic, if the court awards "custody" of the Super Bird to the wife, the husband should pay "vehicle support" because the car has so much "meaning" to the couple; e.g., the wife gets the car, but the husband must pay for gas and maintenance, and gets "visitation" 2 times per week for 3 hours each visit. Sounds crazy, doesn't it?

If you want your animals, and you get them as part of the property settlement, then YOU pay for whatever "maintenance" it takes to take care of the animals, or the car, or the television set, etc.

IAAL

 

[lass]

O.K. IAAL, I apologise for being shirty earlier, but it was mainly because your humour smacked of my husband. Must be something about lawyers.
Your last 2 posts were much more helpful to me - I might not like what you say, but it always helps to know what one's up against.
I don't really go for the comparison between cars and pets. Cars are inanimate objects....and whilst I wouldn't take the Dodge, I might just be tempted by an old Aston or Corvette!

Stephen, thanks for your input. My husband wants to visit both me and the pets, but he doesn't want to support us financially. You know if they were children I wouldn't just give them away, I'd be able to sell them and make a fortune.