Fair? Man must pay alimony dispite ex-wife's lesbian partnership
SuzannePjam
Posts: 411
I guess this guy gets screwed by the religious right's insistance that there must be no gay marriage. While I sympathize with the man, I agree with the judge. She isn't offically married. What do you all think?
Man must pay alimony despite new partnership
Judge: Ex-wife’s lesbian relationship not marriage, payments to continue
Updated: 1 hour, 27 minutes ago
LOS ANGELES - A judge has ordered a man to continue paying alimony to his ex-wife — even though she’s in a registered domestic partnership with another woman and even uses the other woman’s last name.
California marriage laws say alimony ends when a former spouse remarries, and Ron Garber thought that meant he was off the hook when he learned his ex-wife had registered her new relationship under the state’s domestic partnership law.
An Orange County judge didn’t see it that way.
The judge ruled that a registered partnership is cohabitation, not marriage, and that Garber must keep writing the checks, $1,250 a month, to his ex-wife, Melinda Kirkwood. Gerber plans to appeal.
'Irrationality of unequal scheme'
The case highlights questions about the legal status of domestic partnerships, an issue the California Supreme Court is weighing as it considers whether same-sex marriage is legal. An appeals court upheld the state’s ban on same-sex marriage last year, citing the state’s domestic partners law and ruling that it was up to the Legislature to decide whether gays could wed.
Lawyers arguing favor of same-sex marriage say they will cite the June ruling in the Orange County case as a reason to unite gay and heterosexual couples under one system: marriage.
In legal briefs due in August to the California Supreme Court, Therese Stewart, chief deputy city attorney for San Francisco, intends to argue that same sex couples should have access to marriage and that domestic partnership doesn’t provide the same reverence and respect as marriage.
The alimony ruling shows “the irrationality of having a separate, unequal scheme” for same-sex partners, Stewart said.
Unfair law?
Garber knew his former wife was living with another woman when he agreed to the alimony, but he said he didn’t know the two women had registered with the state as domestic partners under a law that was intended to mirror marriage.
“This is not about gay or lesbian,” Garber said. “This is about the law being fair.”
Kirkwood’s attorney, Edwin Fahlen, said the agreement was binding regardless of whether his client was registered as a domestic partner or even married. He said both sides agreed the pact could not be modified and Garber waived his right to investigate the nature of Kirkwood’s relationship.
Garber’s attorney, William M. Hulsy, disagreed.
“If he had signed that agreement under the same factual scenario except marriage, not domestic partnership, his agreement to pay spousal support would be null and void,” Hulsy said.
Man must pay alimony despite new partnership
Judge: Ex-wife’s lesbian relationship not marriage, payments to continue
Updated: 1 hour, 27 minutes ago
LOS ANGELES - A judge has ordered a man to continue paying alimony to his ex-wife — even though she’s in a registered domestic partnership with another woman and even uses the other woman’s last name.
California marriage laws say alimony ends when a former spouse remarries, and Ron Garber thought that meant he was off the hook when he learned his ex-wife had registered her new relationship under the state’s domestic partnership law.
An Orange County judge didn’t see it that way.
The judge ruled that a registered partnership is cohabitation, not marriage, and that Garber must keep writing the checks, $1,250 a month, to his ex-wife, Melinda Kirkwood. Gerber plans to appeal.
'Irrationality of unequal scheme'
The case highlights questions about the legal status of domestic partnerships, an issue the California Supreme Court is weighing as it considers whether same-sex marriage is legal. An appeals court upheld the state’s ban on same-sex marriage last year, citing the state’s domestic partners law and ruling that it was up to the Legislature to decide whether gays could wed.
Lawyers arguing favor of same-sex marriage say they will cite the June ruling in the Orange County case as a reason to unite gay and heterosexual couples under one system: marriage.
In legal briefs due in August to the California Supreme Court, Therese Stewart, chief deputy city attorney for San Francisco, intends to argue that same sex couples should have access to marriage and that domestic partnership doesn’t provide the same reverence and respect as marriage.
The alimony ruling shows “the irrationality of having a separate, unequal scheme” for same-sex partners, Stewart said.
Unfair law?
Garber knew his former wife was living with another woman when he agreed to the alimony, but he said he didn’t know the two women had registered with the state as domestic partners under a law that was intended to mirror marriage.
“This is not about gay or lesbian,” Garber said. “This is about the law being fair.”
Kirkwood’s attorney, Edwin Fahlen, said the agreement was binding regardless of whether his client was registered as a domestic partner or even married. He said both sides agreed the pact could not be modified and Garber waived his right to investigate the nature of Kirkwood’s relationship.
Garber’s attorney, William M. Hulsy, disagreed.
“If he had signed that agreement under the same factual scenario except marriage, not domestic partnership, his agreement to pay spousal support would be null and void,” Hulsy said.
"Where there is sacrifice there is someone collecting the sacrificial offerings."-- Ayn Rand
"Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
"Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
-
Shouldn't have married a dyke.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell0 -
I've never really understood alimony. Child support perhaps. The equal division of property at the end of a marriage yes, but alimony I just don't get.
And I can't ever imagine a time when I would ask for it or expect to get it.NOPE!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift0 -
It sucks for that guy, but legally, it's not a marriage so the judge was right.0
-
isn't alimony usually awarded when a person cannot provide or support themselves (either because of physical reasons or they were dependent on their former partner) and it wasn't their fault that the relationship ended?0
-
markymark550 wrote:isn't alimony usually awarded when a person cannot provide or support themselves (either because of physical reasons or they were dependent on their former partner) and it wasn't their fault that the relationship ended?
I've never really understood the how or why it's awarded marky. I'm not sure that we have it here.NOPE!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift0 -
Here's a wee bit about it, but I'm still trying to find out if it's actually awarded here in Oz.
http://family-law.lawyers.com/divorce/Alimony.htmlNOPE!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift0 -
Jeanie wrote:And I can't ever imagine a time when I would ask for it or expect to get it.
Say you're a stay at home mom/dad for 20 years. Your occupation has been to take care of the kids, raise them, guide them, teach them. Your spouse takes care of the bills while you take care of things at home.
Then your spouse hooks up with a hot 23 year old and dumps your ass and files for divorce. You have no skills, no education, no work history. Hell, there was no internet the last time you worked and even orders at Wendy's have computer screens (when you worked there, they took orders by pen).
You have no trade skills to offer employers, and suddenly you're on your own while your spouse is doing someone younger, while still making tons of green. And let's assume for argument's sake the your ex is taking care of the kids, you still have to take care of yourself, pay rent, eat, etc.
That's why there is alimony.Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?0 -
fanch75 wrote:Say you're a stay at home mom/dad for 20 years. Your occupation has been to take care of the kids, raise them, guide them, teach them. Your spouse takes care of the bills while you take care of things at home.
Then your spouse hooks up with a hot 23 year old and dumps your ass and files for divorce. You have no skills, no education, no work history. Hell, there was no internet the last time you worked and even orders at Wendy's have computer screens (when you worked there, they took orders by pen).
You have no trade skills to offer employers, and suddenly you're on your own while your spouse is doing someone younger, while still making tons of green. And let's assume for argument's sake the your ex is taking care of the kids, you still have to take care of yourself, pay rent, eat, etc.
That's why there is alimony.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it fanch. I can understand why it exists. I'm just saying that I can't imagine I would ever ask for it or expect to get it. NOPE!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift0 -
fanch75 wrote:Hell, there was no internet the last time you worked and even orders at Wendy's have computer screens (when you worked there, they took orders by pen).
They punched the orders into the register, just like today, more or less, in 1980 or so. No pens.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.0 -
yeah, that's what I was trying to sayfanch75 wrote:Say you're a stay at home mom/dad for 20 years. Your occupation has been to take care of the kids, raise them, guide them, teach them. Your spouse takes care of the bills while you take care of things at home.
Then your spouse hooks up with a hot 23 year old and dumps your ass and files for divorce. You have no skills, no education, no work history. Hell, there was no internet the last time you worked and even orders at Wendy's have computer screens (when you worked there, they took orders by pen).
You have no trade skills to offer employers, and suddenly you're on your own while your spouse is doing someone younger, while still making tons of green. And let's assume for argument's sake the your ex is taking care of the kids, you still have to take care of yourself, pay rent, eat, etc.
That's why there is alimony. 0 -
no, it's not fair. why do homosexuals have any rights? she shouldn't get a cent just for being gay. then she should be tarred and feathered.0
-
Same case is going on in Florida, a woman divorced her husband and had a sex change she is now a man and he is refusing to pay, good for him. Divorce is another way to get over on men, and I don't wanna hear it women have it fucking made in divorce, child custody, alimony etc..Philly '98 '00 (1 & 2) '03 '06 (1 & 2) '08 (1 & 2)
East Rutherford '98
Merriweather '98
Gorge '05
Vancouver '05
Los Angeles I,II '06
Santa Barbara '06
Fonda Theater '060 -
Judge is right. If it is not recognized as a legal marriage by the state... the marriage does not exist.
...
Continue with the Wage Garnishing.Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
There's an easy fix to this particular problem. Treat partnerships on the same line as marriages, *poof* problem gone. Marriage is a contract in the eyes of the state for all purposes. Noone should be kept from signing a voluntary contract. And let the churches do as they want.
That's getting closer to reality here in Norway now. The gender-nautral marriage law seems like it will pass.
Peace
Dan"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 19650 -
It seems like an easy fix, but we all know it would take an act of God to pass that kind of law...so not quite so easyOutOfBreath wrote:There's an easy fix to this particular problem. Treat partnerships on the same line as marriages, *poof* problem gone.0 -
Alimony is probably one of the biggest fucking scams on this planet. In certain cases I can understand it but for the most part it is used by one spouse to financially punish the other. My ex tried to get me for alimony but lucky for me our divorce was filed prior to our 10 year anniversary. So in the state of New Jersey that means no alimony for you."When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul0
-
mammasan wrote:Alimony is probably one of the biggest fucking scams on this planet. In certain cases I can understand it but for the most part it is used by one spouse to financially punish the other. My ex tried to get me for alimony but lucky for me our divorce was filed prior to our 10 year anniversary. So in the state of New Jersey that means no alimony for you.
See? And this is where I would take issue with it mamma.
If I had contributed to a marriage as the sole care giver, child rearer and household manager to the detriment of me also having out of the home employment during the course of a marriage, then possibly I could see the point to alimony. But really, once a divorce is in the process of being settled to my mind the only thing that needs to be looked at is the distribution of assets and the financial support of any children which should be divided equally between the partners. And supposing I did apply for alimony, I really can't see it being a responsibility once I begin another relationship, married or otherwise.
But then I can't see me ever being married and relying solely on a partner for my livelihood anyway.NOPE!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift0 -
Jeanie wrote:See? And this is where I would take issue with it mamma.
If I had contributed to a marriage as the sole care giver, child rearer and household manager to the detriment of me also having out of the home employment during the course of a marriage, then possibly I could see the point to alimony. But really, once a divorce is in the process of being settled to my mind the only thing that needs to be looked at is the distribution of assets and the financial support of any children which should be divided equally between the partners. And supposing I did apply for alimony, I really can't see it being a responsibility once I begin another relationship, married or otherwise.
But then I can't see me ever being married and relying solely on a partner for my livelihood anyway.
In the situation you just described I would agree with alimony. In many situations what you have is two people who both have full-time jobs/careers and just because one makes more does not entitle the other to alimony.
In my case I made more than my ex by a decent amount. She was making a good salary just mine happened to better. She used this as a basis for claiming she needed alimony. With her salary and the amount of child support I pay she can live comfortably but definitely not have the life style she had before. Had it not been for a NJ statute that states that a couple must be married for 10 years to collect lifetime alimony I would be paying her every month. For what so she can go shopping like she used to. Take her new boyfriend out on the weekends because he doesn't have a pot to piss in. It is in these cases where I see alimony as a fucking scam. I was saved because of a technicality. Others are not so lucky."When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul0 -
I have a question. I don't know much about this. What happens if the one ordered to pay alimony loses his/her job? What happens if the one receiving alimony starts making more than the one ordered to pay alimony? Does alimony stop when one gets remarried?The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein0 -
mammasan wrote:In the situation you just described I would agree with alimony. In many situations what you have is two people who both have full-time jobs/careers and just because one makes more does not entitle the other to alimony.
In my case I made more than my ex by a decent amount. She was making a good salary just mine happened to better. She used this as a basis for claiming she needed alimony. With her salary and the amount of child support I pay she can live comfortably but definitely not have the life style she had before. Had it not been for a NJ statute that states that a couple must be married for 10 years to collect lifetime alimony I would be paying her every month. For what so she can go shopping like she used to. Take her new boyfriend out on the weekends because he doesn't have a pot to piss in. It is in these cases where I see alimony as a fucking scam. I was saved because of a technicality. Others are not so lucky.
Yes. I agree that in your case it's not reasonable.
I'm still a little mystified by it though, because as far as I'm aware, we really don't have it here. I mean child support yes, but spousal support, I'm really struggling to find anything on it.
Frankly if I walk out of a relationship with what I walked in with and manage to equally and fairly devide what was accrued during the course of the relationship then I'm a happy camper. I wouldn't want to be continually attached to an ex for any reason. And I certainly wouldn't want to rely on them for money. Of course this could possibly explain why I've never married or had children. NOPE!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help