TMB Divorce Thread

Some of you apparently put more research into your fantasy football teams than the women you're marrying.

 

Yea I feel bad for him. Hopefully he can get i changed. I mean paying 1500/month for life to a woman that makes probably 50K (not sure what RN's make in FL) on top of child support is unreal. And it's not like he's a millionaire. I mean he's a project managing engineer (and we don't pay engineers extra money to be project managers).

 

biggest thing I think I have on my side in all this is her dad... he and my mother in law went through a divorce about 5 years ago and he sees his daughter doing the same exact thing to me that his ex did to him... no matter what people have been telling her, he has kept her from being stupid about what she expects to get out of this... in a weird way he has tempered her expectations and kept them at a reasonable level...

 

In my experiences, if it sounds absurd, it's probably because you're only getting his side of the story. I'd be willing to bet there was more to it than a judge being unreasonable (be it adultery on his part, imputed income, assets he has, the standard of living, etc.).

Also, life long is a bit of a misnomer. At least in sc, the alimony will terminate upon her remarriage, continuous cohabitation, or substantial change in circumstances. The first two are the most likely to help him. The third is more likely to hurt him tbh.

 

in FL, there is such a thing as permanent alimony... there is currently a huge push within the state to reform alimony laws, especially when it comes to divorce rulings pertaining to long term marriages (in FL, anything over 17 years is classified as long term).

 

Also, while I'm firmly against the movement (and doubt it would apply retroactively to his payments) have him look up the alimony reform movement down there. I know they have a pretty substantial group in Florida and if the statute changes like they're requesting, it could be beneficial to him.

 

I'm aware of permanent periodic alimony. I'll also all but guarantee it terminates upon the death, remarriage, or continuous cohabitation of the supported spouse. Unless he agreed otherwise in a settlement agreement.

 

Generally is for longer marriages with large discrepancies in income and a high standard of living.

Truth.

 

Well yea I'm sure it ends upon death, I'm not sure if his has remarriage on it. There's not a huge difference in lifestyle, like I said she's an RN and he's an engineer. It's not like a millionaire divorcing a housewife. No adultery on either party actually. I'm sure there's more to it but I think he got shafted pretty hard too, and I've heard a lot of horror stories about Florida's alimony laws.

 

I'd bet it does end. I think it's a standard provision in virtually all alimony laws.

And I've seen some horror stories too. Mine normally involve the wife getting screwed though. Post separation adultery has put so many women in the poor house in sc.

 

I don't doubt it, it seems like it can be pretty easy to screw the soon to be ex over in a lot of cases.

 

When I was really young I thought the poor house was a real house. I couldn't imagine who lived there but I didn't want to find out so I hoarded the shit out of my piggy bank money.

 

Especially easy in sc provided she dates. I've seen several cases where a spouse should be getting significant alimony, sleeps with a guy over a year into the action (1.5-2 years after separation) and gets caught doing so. Permanently barred from any award of alimony.

 

That's fucked up. We could probably use an overhaul on divorce/alimony laws period in most states. Oh well... at least it's not me.

 

Yeah. And the irony is the guy normally has another girl and just flaunts the relationship.

And I'm generally against most alimony reform movements. It's basically guys who are pissed they lost their case and are trying to get a second bite at the Apple. Their reform movement is absurdly one sided and lacks credibility. If they addressed fucked situations on both sides (ie the adultery issue in sc), then I'd be more willing to hear them out.

Plus most states leave entitlement, amount, and duration to the discretion of the trial judge, which I think is best, because there's no one-size-fits-all in family court and the factual circumstances are immensely important in each decision. Think cookie cutter legislation will result in more fucked awards (just at the supported spouses expense), the spouse making the payments will still complain that it's too much, and the courts will be overloaded with people trying to get their obligations terminated.

 

Someone gets word she's got a boyfriend. Husband hires pi. She gets caught. You ask the court to terminate alimony.

Any alimony she was paid after the adultery must be repaid (ie alimony payments, health insurance, car payments, etc.) and she might have to pay for the pi fees and Attorney fees as well.

 

That provision no doubt. But adultery is a high standard to prove. If you've got a couple minutes read this excerpt. It's actually fairly entertaining.

Spoiler

II. Alimony
A. Wife's Adultery
 Over one year after Husband left the marital home, but within weeks after the trial court issued a temporary order setting Husband's pendente lite alimony obligation at $8,850 per month, Husband amended his answer to allege Wife had committed adultery with Stephen Everett, the spouse of Husband's paramour Bonnie Everett.   Husband argues the court erred in failing to find that Wife committed adultery and is therefore barred from receiving alimony.   We disagree.
Under S.C.Code Ann. § 20-3-130(A) (Supp.1997), no alimony may be awarded a spouse who commits adultery before the earlier of these two events:  (1) the formal signing of a written property or marital settlement agreement or (2) entry of a permanent order of separate maintenance and support or of a permanent order approving a property or marital settlement agreement between the parties.
 To obtain a divorce based upon adultery, the evidence must be “clear and positive.”  Nemeth v. Nemeth, 325 S.C. 480, 484, 481 S.E.2d 181, 183 (Ct.App.1997).   The infidelity must be established by a clear preponderance of the evidence.  Id.  The proof must be “sufficiently definite to identify the time and place of the offense, and the circumstances under which it was committed.”  Id.  Because adultery is an activity that usually takes place in private, proof of adultery may be circumstantial.   McLaurin v. McLaurin, 294 S.C. 132, 133, 363 S.E.2d 110, 111 (Ct.App.1987).   Circumstantial evidence showing opportunity and inclination to commit adultery is sufficient to establish a prima facie case.  Panhorst v. Panhorst, 301 S.C. 100, 102, 390 S.E.2d 376, 377 (Ct.App.1990).
Whether Wife committed adultery with Stephen Everett is a close question.   The evidence presented on this issue was entirely circumstantial;  however, it established that Wife and Mr. Everett developed a close personal relationship.   While Husband claims the circumstances connected with their relationship suggests sexual intimacy, Wife contends that she and Everett were simply two spurned spouses commiserating with one another.
Wife began communicating by phone with Mr. Everett in the summer of 1994 and continued to do so up until the time of trial.   More than 600 calls were made between the two from August 1994 through April 14, 1995.   The phone calls occurred almost daily, and many of the conversations were lengthy.1  Many of the calls occurred between 11:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m., and many also occurred early in the morning when Wife and Mr. Everett called one another to make sure the other had risen.
Wife spent three weekends out of town in 1995:  January 7 (Fripp Island), January 20 (Fripp Island), and February 17 (Harbor Island).   Despite the fact that there were 172 phone calls between Wife and Mr. Everett during the month of January and eighty-two calls during the month of February, no telephone conversations between the two took place during these three weekends once Wife arrived at the resorts.   On both occasions when registering as a guest at Fripp Island, Wife used her father's credit card and her maiden name.   The registrations list two adults.   When Husband made allegations of adultery against Wife, she drove back to Fripp Island, demanding that its employees delete her files and any record of her stay.   Wife also called back on a later date to inquire whether the files had been deleted.   Although the files were not deleted, they were altered so that an alias, rather than Wife's name, appeared on the records.   Wife denied that anyone accompanied her to Fripp Island and testified she went alone to work on her “client novel.”   She explained she used her father's credit card because her own credit cards were at their maximum credit limit.
Prior to driving to Harbor Island, Wife drove evasively in a rented car to “lose” the private investigator following her.   Wife had several telephone conversations with Mr. Everett en route.   Wife testified she knew she was under surveillance and purposefully ran Husband's detective around because she was angry and wanted to cost Husband money.
Husband admitted into evidence the overnight registry maintained by the guard gate at Harbor Island.   See exhibit 1, infra.   Husband's handwriting expert, Marvin Dawson, testified that the entry immediately following Wife's had been altered from its original state.   The registry shows an entry for McElveen, arriving on February 17, 1995.   The next entry shows a “LEverHart, Jake” arriving eighteen minutes after Wife and staying in an adjacent unit.
Dawson testified that the license plate, which was designated a Georgia plate on the registry, had been changed from QG26411, Everett's plate number, to QG28476.   Georgia Highway Department records showed no record of a license number QG28476.   Dawson further testified that the name “Everett” was originally written in the guest registry, but was changed to LEverHart by a person with different handwriting than the original author.   The first name Jake was also added later, again in a different hand.
Wife was registered to unit 5B, and LEverHart was registered to unit 6B.   However Dawson testified the “6” had been altered by someone writing over the original number.   Finally, Dawson testified both parties were originally recorded as leaving at the exact same time:  1304 on 2/19.   LEverHart's entry, however, had been altered to “1809 2/18.”
Wife presented no expert testimony to refute Dawson's testimony.   Moreover, our own review of the document convinces us that it was indeed altered as Dawson testified.
Dawson also testified that when he went to Harbor Island to examine the document, he was told by the guard responsible for bringing it to him that it had blown out her car window, over a bridge railing, and into the marsh.   However, when Dawson accompanied the guard to the bridge, he was able to recover the document moments before the tide engulfed it.   The near loss of this critical piece of evidence raises additional questions about the Harbor Island incident.
Both Wife and Mr. Everett denied having been together on any of the three weekends in question.   In fact, the two asserted that they had met in person on only one occasion when Wife delivered a carrot cake to Mr. Everett's place of employment in Georgia on February 14, 1995.   Wife and Mr. Everett testified she gave the cake to him in a parking lot at his office as a gesture of gratitude for his assistance in helping her prove Husband had committed adultery.   Also, Wife has given Mr. Everett's children gifts of a doll and video tapes.
We find that the Harbor Island guest registry, along with the absence of phone calls between Wife and Everett on those three weekends, and Wife's attempts to delete any record of her trips to Fripp Island, are all circumstantial evidence of opportunity.   However, there is no evidence linking Wife to the alteration of the registry.   As the trial court pointed out, several other individuals had access to these records, including Husband.   In addition, Everett's testimony that he was not present with Wife on these three weekends was corroborated by other witnesses who the trial court specifically found to be credible and convincing.
We find the numerous phone calls, the delivery of a cake to Mr. Everett in Georgia on Valentines' Day, and Wife's efforts to evade detection and cover up her trips to Fripp Island are circumstantial evidence of inclination.   However, even if this court found, taking its own view of the evidence, that Everett was present with Wife on the weekends in question, there is virtually no evidence of a romantic or sexual relationship between the two.   The trial judge commented in his final order on the lack of evidence to support a showing of inclination, noting there were no love letters, romantic cards, no hand-holding, hugging, kissing, or any other romantic demonstrations or actions between the two.   The trial court found this lack of evidence compelling, especially in light of the fact that Husband spent thousands of dollars on private detectives in an attempt to uncover such evidence.
 Husband bore the burden at trial, as he does on appeal, of convincing the court that Wife committed adultery.2  While adultery may be proven by circumstantial evidence, such evidence must be “so convincing as to exclude any other reasonable hypothesis but that of guilt.”   Fulton v. Fulton, 293 S.C. 146, 147, 359 S.E.2d 88, 88 (Ct.App.1987).   Furthermore, a divorce on the ground of adultery should be denied “if after due consideration of all the evidence proof of guilt is inconclusive.”  McLaurin v. McLaurin, 294 S.C. 132, 134, 363 S.E.2d 110, 111 (1987) (quoting Odom v. Odom, 248 S.C. 144, 146, 149 S.E.2d 353, 354 (1966)).
While we reiterate that this is an extremely close case, we feel the circumstantial evidence presented at trial falls short of the required “clear preponderance” of the evidence.   Moreover, the able trial judge, who heard several days of testimony and observed first-hand the demeanor of the many witnesses in this case, was in a better position than this court to determine the credibility of those witnesses.  Cherry v. Thomasson, 276 S.C. 524, 280 S.E.2d 541 (1981).   We therefore defer to the trial court's decision that Husband did not present sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove Wife committed adultery.

Also in sc, there is a presumption in favor of permanent periodic alimony provided it's not a short term marriage, so that can really fuck a guy over.

 

we should follow the lead of our scandinavian superiors and eliminate alimony entirely

 

http://www.brobible.com/life/article/man-moves-to-cave-after-divorce/

 

Anybody try marriage counseling before doing the divorce? What was your experience with it?

 

Waste of time. Just guessing here.

 

Kinda seems like we need to try all options with kids involved.

 

Yeah, that makes a difference. It's worth giving it a shot. Just be prepared for you to be the bad guy and the root of all problems.

 

I was under the impression that Florida courts are super hesitant to give permanent alimony.

 

Don't. It's worse for the kids to have parents that don't get along, then it is for you to be apart. I speak from experience. Plus, at least for me, the dating scene has been great.

 

We tried but it was clear it was too late. Even the counselor pointed out that she wasn't giving any effort. It was ultimately a waste of time.

 

The problem with counseling is most couples wait till the relationship is too far gone before they try this option... it can't hurt to give a few sessions a try but both parties have to be completely willing to do it or it's a waste...

 

We tried it. Honestly by that point even we knew we were doomed but it at least got us to the point where we could talk rationally to each other an made us able to divorce mostly amicably rather than it being a dog fight. We kept going to the guy a few sessions after we decided to split just cuz it was a safe place to talk.

 

Yeah. I don't do family law but I think (maybe due a recent law change) that permanent alimony in Florida is only available after 17 years of marriage and then only after a strenuous factual finding by the judge

 

You can't really get trapped by child support agreements, as child support is always subject to change. The one instance where you could is if you agreed to pay for/contribute to college. Most states can't order you to pay it, unless you agreed to previously.

Alimony can be a real bitch though, if you're not as successful after the agreement. I'm sure a bunch of guys got/are getting their shit pushed in since 2008.

Also, regarding jail, in sc, you can only be jailed for a willful failure to pay. It may be different in other states, but basically your spouse has to show that you can make the payments and are simply choosing not to. Seems simple enough, but issues arise if someone has income imputed to them (the court says they can earn more money but are choosing not to). Those cases can get a little dicey.

 

Yeah, Im not sure what's going to happen. I'm at the point now where I want to try and fix things where she's not sure, but is willing to give it a shot because of the kids

 

Fix things

 

Financially speaking divorce is the worst thing that can ever happen to you.

Spend a lot of time making sure the person you marry is the right person.

 

My life isn't that bad after reading three pages of this

 

Holy fuck man, you had a fake ovarian cancer scare then the real thing? Holy shit.