Alimony / retroactive question

[Before you can make things better, you have to stop making them worse...]

Separated over two and a half years.

H  filed for a modification in support a year and a half ago. We still have not had that hearing. Both L's and h continued it a few times.

Post seperation , after h received the divorce complaint, and pre final divorce, can income earned in that time frame be subjected to alimony?  (Me to pay h. )

And can it be retroactive to the date he filed for modification? Even though  property sold afterwards.

And is the retroactive alimony  ever paid in one lump sum ?

At the hearing h and his L, wanted a lump sum payment of alimony but he had no calculations or criteria to uphold the figure he came up with.

[whirlpoollife]

Separated over two and a half years.

H  filed for a modification in support a year and a half ago. We still have not had that hearing. Both L's and h continued it a few times.

Post seperation , after h received the divorce complaint, and pre final divorce, can income earned in that time frame be subjected to alimony?  (Me to pay h. )

And can it be retroactive to the date he filed for modification? Even though  property sold afterwards.

And is the retroactive alimony  ever paid in one lump sum ?

At the hearing h and his L, wanted a lump sum payment of alimony but he had no calculations or criteria to uphold the figure he came up with.

[DreamGirl]

Separated over two and a half years.

H  filed for a modification in support a year and a half ago. We still have not had that hearing. Both L's and h continued it a few times.

Post seperation , after h received the divorce complaint, and pre final divorce, can income earned in that time frame be subjected to alimony?  (Me to pay h. )

And can it be retroactive to the date he filed for modification? Even though  property sold afterwards.

And is the retroactive alimony  ever paid in one lump sum ?

At the hearing h and his L, wanted a lump sum payment of alimony but he had no calculations or criteria to uphold the figure he came up with.

What does your lawyer say?

I know that child support is retro-active to when you filed the modification. My husband filed for modification, but did not seek the retro-support to be credited to what he was paying. (Just part of agreeing to terms)

In my case, the judge ordered that the increase in support be implemented on the date the order was signed (we went to trial), not the date I filed. The reason being that the original order wasn't really valid, so he considered the 9 years that he paid child support was voluntary. Even though the county was garnishing his wages.

So I think it really just depends.   

Not very helpful, I know. But I would definitely ask your attorney being that you're the one who would be paying.

[ForeverDad]

As much as the courts hate having to actually decide a case (they hate the risk of appeals and would rather delay a case to get a settlement that is supposed to make both sides less unhappy) you do need someone with Authority to step up and state what the outcome would be.  Can you get the judge to at least rule on whether the inheritance or FOO proceeds are considered marital assets and then let the settlement attempts resume for one more continuance?  As long as the question remains unresolved whether your lump sum is marital money or not then he will keep using it as leverage to coerce you into retreat and Gift him a chunk.

Also, now's the time to speak up to the judge that your husband or ex-husband is over 18 years of age  , can work, should work and that all calculations should use whichever is higher, his actual income or his imputed income based on past income and/or qualifications.  There should be no excuse for him to be a lazy bum, freeloader, free spirit or whatever he calls himself.  I'd bet even a ditch digger for a construction company makes far more than minimum wage.

There was a CA case where a doctor quit his practice and started flipping burgers but the court ruled that his child support would be based not on his actual lower income but his higher past income that he could resume.

[livednlearned]

When someone files for a modification of support, there has to be a reason, right? And your H is making the claim that your inheritance is the reason? Like FD was saying, you need to get that inheritance piece nailed down by judge #1. Then (if I'm understanding the sequence of how things are supposed to go), when your L explains to judge #2 that your ex is trying to get his hands on the inheritance by modifying child support, judge #2 says No.

I don't know if you happen to love reading case law, but you can look that stuff up online through Google Scholar, the public version lets you search for case law by state. At the very least, it might help you suggest stuff to your L and get that conversation nailed down so you see the strategy clear as possible. Even good attorneys can phone things in, so the fact you're jumping around in the case law files will help get your L to pay attention.

[whirlpoollife]

I wish my L had authority!  He looks at numbers not the entitlement of h, however he is beginning to see it.   The  modification h filed is to get money that is not his.

I was searching online, on alimony. I will print out and highlight it for my L.

There is more criteria for alimony than who has more money.  ( actual wording... .alimony is not an entitlement)

H will get a percentage of my share of my familly's business.  At the same time I have a capital gain from the sale of it. H wants to use that to get the alimony.  The capital gain is classified as income to me. But it is a one time deal and I did not receive that till  a year and a half after filing for divorce. It has nothing to do with the lifestyle in marriage. In marriage I contributed , work and $, to h and his businesses unpaid. He continuted nothing to my family's . His earning capacity is greater. Etc.

Yes I will use his imputed income on h from last couple years as I think he is hurrying to lower it. Good idea.

I will search case law  too online. No not my favorite , because I'm sick of my own case, but I liked what I found on alimony guidelines.

Part of my not agreeing to h' s wanting a chunk of alimony was I felt that should be heard at the modification  for support hearing.  That is separate from the division of assets hearing. In h's previous settlement offer, he wanted that neither party could get alimony from the other one, but he has since changed his mind... .

I also found that not all marital assets need to be divided with the same percentage.

Thanks to all for your thoughts and ideas

[whirlpoollife]

My attorney now refers to the "alimony" that h wants is spousal support. Support prior to divorce. Alimony is payment to a spouse after support.  So I studied everything on alimony thinking it was alimony that my L said to give and h wants.

Over two and a half years post seperation, h wants spousal support .  I had a one time capital gain that h and his L are arguing that it is income therefore h gets support. I gained this capital gain  income a year and a half post seperation.   

My L is pressuring me to just give it to him to end it all and move on. I want to go to the support dept hearing that keeps getting continued.  My L says who knows what they will say so better to give this amount.  I'd prefer the state guidlines vs L and entitlement of h.  ( I also said to my L that I think its h's L is needing paid that why I am pressured on this to give in)

Does anyone know about post seperation , predivorce , income and how that is handled for support to the other spouse?

I will talk to personally, by myself , no L ,  to the support dept next week. I don't know how much info they can provide without it being the actual support hearing.

[livednlearned]

How frustrating whirlpool. At least now it's clear what he's going for -- I would've been confused about that too. It wasn't until I saw a thread here about the difference between spousal support and alimony that I realized there was a difference. Lawyers don't bend over backwards to explain this stuff, they're so used to it I guess.

You know your H best --- I think some pwBPD would actually be able to settle (ie. accept a lump sum of spousal support) and the conflict would lessen, at least in this one area. But with my ex, rolling over a boundary was like winning in a video game. He would get a small gain and then fire up a whole new issue. It's still not totally clear to me how different degrees of narcissism influence our cases, it just seems like it does.

Maybe a question for your L is, "How would a judge rule on the question of spousal support, knowing that I inherited money 1.5 years after date of separation?" That would give you an idea about what the law says. What your L is suggesting is reasonable, but it could just lead to even more aggressive boundary busting in other areas. If your H has a lot of narcissism, he needs to feel that he won somehow. The question is how to let him feeling like he's winning in a way that doesn't mean you lose.

If I could roll back the clock and redo my mediation all over again, I would interview that person to see how they handle narcissists. I do think that very skilled negotiators can validate and listen to the feelings of narcissists/borderlines, and not agree to the terms, and still make the N/BPD feel that they have gotten a good deal. Some of Bill Eddy's training documents give examples of how to do this, but it takes a lot of skill. I know that my mediator wasn't skilled that way.

Another thought is if there is something you want to negotiate using this leverage. "I will give H half the sum he is asking for, but in return he signs a document that he will sign the quit claim deed."  Or whatever it is you want that's valuable to you. Not saying he is likely to give you that, just that you have some leverage with this if you want.

[ForeverDad]

Though it may not make much impact legally, judges are often granted liberal discretion in their rulings and so you could demonstrate to the court how he has been delaying the case needlessly with continuances and failure to provide needed information - 2.5 years is quite excessive! - that you are convinced it was an attempt to milk the marriage as long as he could.

I recall my lawyer estimated a basic divorce at 6 months and 7-9 months with children.  It turned out to be a couple weeks shy of 2 years, partly because her temporary custody and parenting was so favorable that she had every incentive - both financially and to be in control - to delay as much as she could.

I think I wrote this before... .how much difference is there between what he is seeking and what the judge might rule?  If not much, then just let the judge rule.  (Frankly, I lean that way a lot, lawyers prefer settlements but if a court decision isn't much worse then go for the decision.)  If you settle, then your loss is locked in, if the judge decides then there may not be a loss or perhaps much less than what ex feels entitled to.

I agree... .

I think some pwBPD would actually be able to settle... .But with my ex, rolling over a boundary was like winning in a video game. He would get a small gain and then fire up a whole new issue.

Maybe a question for your L is, "How would a judge rule on the question of spousal support, knowing that I inherited money 1.5 years after date of separation?" That would give you an idea about what the law says. What your L is suggesting is reasonable, but it could just lead to even more aggressive boundary busting in other areas. If your H has a lot of narcissism, he needs to feel that he won somehow. The question is how to let him feeling like he's winning in a way that doesn't mean you lose.

If I could roll back the clock... .I do think that very skilled negotiators can validate and listen to the feelings of narcissists/borderlines, and not agree to the terms, and still make the N/BPD feel that they have gotten a good deal. Some of Bill Eddy's training documents give examples of how to do this, but it takes a lot of skill.

Another thought is if there is something you want to negotiate using this leverage. "I will give H half the sum he is asking for, but in return he signs a document that he will sign the quit claim deed."  Or whatever it is you want that's valuable to you. Not saying he is likely to give you that, just that you have some leverage with this if you want.

[whirlpoollife]

I might be repeating some  of this so I apologize. My heads spins from it. In their first settlement offer last Sept, h wanted 20k cash in " equitable distribution" beside etc etc.  I said no because the cash he wants extra is inheritance. Also in that first settlement , he did not ask for support except that after the final decree, neither spouse is entitled to any support from the other. I agreed.   At same time h wanted a modification in support hearing to not pay child support and ask for support. That hearing has been delayed numerous times by, both L's ,and h.  So far, not by me once.

Then at the division of assets hearing, h's L surprised me with h wanting 25k in alimony. I told my L that h does not fit any if the criteria for him to receive alimony.  Oh, so then it got changed to spousal support.

Again h's L says he is entitled to it and wants to settle that before the support hearing.   They are now combining  the two , support and division of assets into one settlement.  I don't like that be because, h wants the support ,c/s and spousal support ,that he had paid to me, all back. This is someone who had his license suspended for lack of payment, 6k.   But I argued that what about future support? Who calulates that and now that I am paying med ins, how is that calculated.  Besides , a year and a half ago , the support dept went by state guidelines for me to receive both supports so if I pay past support back to h, then in a sense I am agreeing to go against the ruling of a year and half ago.  Back then h had back support to pay so his wanting retroactive support  from me is a " if you do this to me,I'm going to do it to you".

As of yesterday,  it looks like I am going to stay in the house.  Not 100% yet. I would have to buy him out. It goes on current market value, not the hurry up and get the house appraised appraisal I had to get over two years ago value.   So that marital asset is now higher . More money to h now than if this was settled months ago.

Couple years ago,  h had court order to move out of the house , his L had added a lot onto it. My then L rolls over and pressured me to say yes.   One was he received both vehicles.  I received no money for this in return for them.

My present L and I had them  as part of the marital assets to be divided. Blue book value.  

Now the other L has them as part of the total marital assets that he wants me to pay h 60% of in one lump sum   So... .h got the cars , but now I am to pay him for them . Huh?

Plus at the hearing with divorce master, they were already divided by the divorce master. H got the higher priced one. ( which my dad had paid for most of it for him) .

I didn't catch that at first reading of this proposal.   The rest of the numbers are so twisted from the original numbers also.  It's almost like the other L makes it so confusing, and so pressured that I start working off his numbers and wants to come to an agreemnt instead of the original factual numbers .  

I will work on if I have to pay h extra cash, there has to be something in return. I am going to fight it though. Because it's now up to 30k cash he wants.  

I too prefer to go to the support hearing and go by state guidelines.   But now that is me against three.

Lnl, you said once before, that maybe it's my L who doesn't want to go to court. I think you are right. Even though he has been around for some time in the legal profession.

I'm ready to go on my own almost.

I have read some case law and found that there is an entitlement defense I can use . That the support h wants is an entitlemnt issue.  

I also told my L , that giving in to h is not going to make him go away. His next step will be to fight me for more custody , just to not pay or get paid support.  He will not go away if we just give in.

FD, when I first read your posts some time ago, that your divorce took two years, I thought noo way.

I appreciate the help in this. I will put to use the advice . I rambled a bit much here.

[livednlearned]

There was a moment in my case where I went from thinking everyone else knew what was best to realizing I was the only one who got it. My L is really good, but it was a process. I had to make some pretty big mistakes before I figured out how to stick to my guns.

You're at that point -- you understand the limitations of your L, and what your H's L is up to. That's a really good turning point. It means you are the boss of your own situation. Your L works for you.

If you think the proposal is wrong, then it's wrong. Try to think ahead 3, 4 moves to anticipate what they are going to do. Figure out your bottom line (might be going before a judge), and if needed, build the story about obstruction that undermines the amount your H is asking for. If you think court is a likely option, and are nervous -- go sit in and watch a few cases to see how it works. I think it's worth it. Usually there are 10-15 people waiting. Sometimes the judge will want to know who is in the seats, but my experience is that only happens when there's a heated case like mine, and judge wants to clear court.

Anyway, if you are thinking about court, then maybe come up with a really low ball offer for H. If he's going to be asking for more, offer him even less. 

You have to be so organized in court, it goes by very quick, just sppppfffft and it's over. Your L has to be a bit outraged on your behalf otherwise he'll just keep suggesting you settle for a crappy deal.

[whirlpoollife]

I found a case , with simality, where the h prolonged the divorce process, w had an increase in pay , h became unemployed, h filed for support from w.  Outcome, h was not granted support as it was near the end of seperation with final decree inament and he intentionally prolonged the divorce. I sent it on to my L.  I repeated h's actions here.

L says now I have a good case against h receiving support from me. Well worth time to research.  ( thanks lnl !).  But ... .child support to me might get decreased.   I said what about the other years ? I made a strong point to my L that if there is any changes in support I want it directly from the support dept not just a non enforcable court order.   

We made another offer. In it it stated that if no agreement I will go again before the divorce master and to the support hearing to present my case.

L said he has a strong feeling that h does not want to go before the master or to support dept. ( that was the hearing h wanted in the first place ).  And again he said to me I need to consider my own economic issues when we receive a counter offer. 

I have much to ponder but wait for now.   I feel the end is near, but a year ago I felt the same too.

[livednlearned]

I feel the end is near, but a year ago I felt the same too.

That's great that you found a precedent! I wonder how they were able to show that the H intentionally prolonged the divorce. And smart about getting changes directly from the support dept. In many states, CS is better protected that any other financial settlements.

Your L might be right about H not wanting to go before the master or support dept. But your L also doesn't seem to fully grasp BPD. One thing I realized with N/BPDx -- he doesn't just think he's the victim, he believes it. It's real to him. And he behaved like anyone would who felt deeply wronged or misunderstood or persecuted. I was struck by the degree of self-sabotage that went on. It only makes sense when you try to understand it from the perspective of the disorder, and the distortions going on in their minds.

But who knows, maybe your H will listen to his L.

[ForeverDad]

I found a case , with similarity, where the h prolonged the divorce process, w had an increase in pay , h became unemployed, h filed for support from w.  Outcome, h was not granted support as it was near the end of separation with final decree imminent and he intentionally prolonged the divorce. I sent it on to my L.  I repeated h's actions here.

L says now I have a good case against h receiving support from me. Well worth time to research.  ( thanks lnl !).

Feels like we have to point the lawyers to solutions, they're either not experienced with handling difficult, obstructive cases or they're just not as vested in the outcome as we are.  I mean, if we could see it just wasn't right, why couldn't they see it too and determine whether the scenario had been adjudicated in prior cases - case law?

I recall CA had a case where a doctor had quit and started working flipping burgers, all to avoid child support to spite his ex.  The CA courts didn't let him get away with it, they based the decision on his imputed or potential income.

However, I get the impression here that they let ex-spouses get away with a lot - just not too much.  Apparently there are limits.

[whirlpoollife]

I wonder how they were able to show that the H intentionally prolonged the divorce. .

One thing I realized with N/BPDx -- he doesn't just think he's the victim, he believes it. It's real to him. And he behaved like anyone would who felt deeply wronged or misunderstood or persecuted.  

But who knows, maybe your H will listen to his L.

"... .while both the master and the trial court did factor what they believed to be husbands dilatory conduct into their decision to deny his request for APL , this was not the only factor in their decision... "

(Dilatory, means to cause delay)

Not very specific. For me I have letters from my L to his L asking what is it his client wants.  Then my L waiting for the two year seperation date , again asking what is it they want. Then again. Not until my L listened to me to appoint a divorce master, did we get some movement.  

Yes h believes he is the victim. Still and always.  I did him wrong by saying no more abuse and made the decision to end the marriage.  His power punching bag, no more.   In his mind he doesn't do anything wrong, he is blameless, he is perfect, he is better, he smarter ,  he believes his own lies, and if anyone disagrees , then retaliation must be had.  My parents money is his as if he were their child.   Going onto three years, he is still looking , if not me , who is the blame for the breakup.   Smear campaign continues.  

Because of his thought out mind games he thrived on for power and thrills over his wife,   because of the parental alienation , I can't bring myself to have sympathy for him.

For me, I was a victim, now survivor , onto thrivor  

[whirlpoollife]

Feels like we have to point the lawyers to solutions, they're either not experienced with handling difficult, obstructive cases or they're just not as vested in the outcome as we are.  I mean, if we could see it just wasn't right, why couldn't they see it too and determine whether the scenario had been adjudicated in prior cases - case law?

I recall CA had a case where a doctor had quit and started working flipping burgers, all to avoid child support to spite his ex.  The CA courts didn't let him get away with it, they based the decision on his imputed or potential income.

However, I get the impression here that they let ex-spouses get away with a lot - just not too much.  Apparently there are limits.

Much of my arguments to my L, makes him think more, because I am not going to just roll over and say OK, ( as I did with first L )

My L came up with the fact that the capital gain was not attained in one year, it was over the years my parents owned the property too, so it has to be annualized.  That's a good point that I could not have come with on my own.

Yes I pointed out to L that if h is unemployed, ( I see him on days he would be working, and a confidant said he is planing to leave his job) he needs his income imputed. L did say they would go on what he was recently making.  Again if I didn't bring that up, would my L have? 

I think it helps to be as educated on the laws as one who is not in the legal profession can be.

[livednlearned]

I think it helps to be as educated on the laws as one who is not in the legal profession can be.

So true. And you (and many others here) became more assertive over time, after the marriage ended and it became easier to see clearly.

I would not want to go through this all over again, but at the same time, I'm amazed how much more confident and assertive I've become. I don't know if it would've happened quite like this if I didn't have the legal challenges to overcome. They made me grow a backbone.