Settlement Conference Question

[FL_Needs_To_Change]

As a funny side note: the bio dad was claiming that he had little contact with the ex over the years when we know that to be untrue. In an effort to counter this, she sent me an email asking if I had copies of the emails and IM discussions she had with him that I discovered when she used my computer! I'm not even responding to the request. Considering they show that she was actively pursuing a relationship with the guy as far back as 2003 (we split in 2006), I'm not sure she'd want that in open court anyhow lol.

Keep them on the back burner.
If she/he attempts to push the no prior contact between, then you can clearly demonstrate otherwise without uttering a single word.
The best way to show something in court is to use the claiming person's own words.

Best of luck!

FL

[About_Time]

The motion has been delayed AGAIN. The bio dad wants a paternity test now, so they are putting everything off by another week at least to sort some stuff out. We'll probably have our stuff sorted out somewhat separately now, but it allows us more time to prepare.

It's a credit to the people on this board when my lawyer comes at me with info or plans that I've already gotten from members here. She was talking today about the conflicting case law and the need for us to come to the motion with an offer in hand. It was very deja vu

As a funny side note: the bio dad was claiming that he had little contact with the ex over the years when we know that to be untrue. In an effort to counter this, she sent me an email asking if I had copies of the emails and IM discussions she had with him that I discovered when she used my computer! I'm not even responding to the request. Considering they show that she was actively pursuing a relationship with the guy as far back as 2003 (we split in 2006), I'm not sure she'd want that in open court anyhow lol.

[FL_Needs_To_Change]

I went looking for cases that addressed the duration of the granting of SS, and the decisions seem to be at the descretion of the court on any particular day.

However, this case,
CanLII - 2004 CanLII 5005 (ON S.C.)

has a nice additive of a clear explaination of the history behind awarding such. Scroll down to 5.1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF SPOUSAL SUPPORT

I like it because it sites so many case histories on each determining factor for decision making. This is worth a read.

FL

[About_Time]

For FL:

When we put it to the judge at the case conference he suggested that I would probably pay some portional amount for my son, with the bio dad paying another portion. He suggested I think a 1/3 me, 2/3 him split. Ultimately, this is really going to depend on the judge we get more than anything else.

He's my son and I love him, so I will abide by any ruling and pay up with a smile on my face, but it would be nice to get a little relief given the screwjob I'm expecting re: SS.

[logicalvelocity]

I have been reviewing cases where a person in place of a parent has applied to add the biological parent as a thrid party to a case. In many they were dismissed for something as simple as not serving notice of the motion on the biological parent. There have also been cases where the application was dismissed to avoid further complication of the case and increase court costs, how horrible a thought. The courts not allowing this based purely on keeping things simple.

However, here is an interesting one that could easily have been turned aournd.

CanLII - 1998 CanLII 14932 (ON S.C.)

See paragraph 19-
[19] The respondent on this motion seeks an order adding the biological father, Mr. Broderick, as a party. I am unaware of any provision in the Divorce Act or the Rules that would permit Mr. Broderick to be added as a party. No authority was cited. It is clear, however, that the court, nevertheless, must direct its attention to the obligation of Mr. Broderick to contribute to Christopher’s support. Section 5 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, SOR/97-175, provides:

5. Where the spouse against whom a child support order is sought stands in the place of a parent for a child, the amount of a child support order is, in respect of that spouse, such amount as the court considers appropriate, having regard to these Guidelines and any other parent’s legal duty to support the child. [Emphasis added.]

Another one of interest,

CanLII - 2003 ABQB 15 (CanLII)

[34] In any event, the biological father’s responsibility does not extinguish the obligation of a step parent deemed to be in loco parentis. Mr. Rolls has advanced no reason why he believes that adding the biological father would assist the court in resolving matters before it.

[35] It is open to the court in any event to consider the obligation of the biological father and that information as to his situation is before the court. Mr. Rolls is at liberty to examine Mrs. Rolls on the information she has provided about the biological father’s circumstances with maintenance enforcement in the ordinary course pursuant to the Rules of Court. Adding the biological father at this stage would, in my view, unnecessarily complicate the proceedings and add to the costs.

FL,

Nice research!


Very Interesting. Two decisions and the court ruled in opposite directions. It appears it is going to roll on the courts discretion and what particular mood the Judge is in for said hearing.

Because multiple families and multiple obligations are becoming commonplace, I suspect there is more jurisprudence out there dealing with this issue. If it was me, I would be researching it and submitting cases that stay the matter.

[logicalvelocity]

He's already been added. In fact, my lawyer just advised me that he is now challenging paternity and wants a blood test done before they decide on his contribution. My hope is that they wind up delaying the entire thing but my guess is that they will just keep the status quo on CS (me paying 100%) and make a temporary determination on SS which can be re-assessed once CS is sorted out.

Thanks for the advice everyone BTW, and for letting me vent lol

Nothing like opening a can of worms. I do think the claim against you for Child support will be stayed until the court has time to examine the results of the paternity test with respect to the apparent Bio parent.

[FL_Needs_To_Change]

I have been reviewing cases where a person in place of a parent has applied to add the biological parent as a thrid party to a case. In many they were dismissed for something as simple as not serving notice of the motion on the biological parent. There have also been cases where the application was dismissed to avoid further complication of the case and increase court costs, how horrible a thought. The courts not allowing this based purely on keeping things simple.

However, here is an interesting one that could easily have been turned aournd.

CanLII - 1998 CanLII 14932 (ON S.C.)

See paragraph 19-
[19] The respondent on this motion seeks an order adding the biological father, Mr. Broderick, as a party. I am unaware of any provision in the Divorce Act or the Rules that would permit Mr. Broderick to be added as a party. No authority was cited. It is clear, however, that the court, nevertheless, must direct its attention to the obligation of Mr. Broderick to contribute to Christopher’s support. Section 5 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, SOR/97-175, provides:

5. Where the spouse against whom a child support order is sought stands in the place of a parent for a child, the amount of a child support order is, in respect of that spouse, such amount as the court considers appropriate, having regard to these Guidelines and any other parent’s legal duty to support the child. [Emphasis added.]

Another one of interest,

CanLII - 2003 ABQB 15 (CanLII)

[34] In any event, the biological father’s responsibility does not extinguish the obligation of a step parent deemed to be in loco parentis. Mr. Rolls has advanced no reason why he believes that adding the biological father would assist the court in resolving matters before it.

[35] It is open to the court in any event to consider the obligation of the biological father and that information as to his situation is before the court. Mr. Rolls is at liberty to examine Mrs. Rolls on the information she has provided about the biological father’s circumstances with maintenance enforcement in the ordinary course pursuant to the Rules of Court. Adding the biological father at this stage would, in my view, unnecessarily complicate the proceedings and add to the costs.

[About_Time]

A good move on your part is to name the BIO parent as a party when the motion or fothcoming hearing occurs for child support. IE: Bring your own motion to name them! The law provides that you may add a party on motion.

He's already been added. In fact, my lawyer just advised me that he is now challenging paternity and wants a blood test done before they decide on his contribution. My hope is that they wind up delaying the entire thing but my guess is that they will just keep the status quo on CS (me paying 100%) and make a temporary determination on SS which can be re-assessed once CS is sorted out.

Thanks for the advice everyone BTW, and for letting me vent lol

[logicalvelocity]

Turned out to be a moot point in some ways, because she is apparently filing a motion to get spousal and child support decided ASAP... like in 10 days. I still haven't seen her financial disclosure or that of the bio dad, so I'm hoping the judge won't just order something in that short of a time frame and under those conditions.

She keeps talking the talk about negotation, but she isn't walking the walk. I think at this point it's fair to assume that she's just going to drag everything through the court.

A good move on your part is to name the BIO parent as a party when the motion or fothcoming hearing occurs for child support. IE: Bring your own motion to name them! The law provides that you may add a party on motion.

[logicalvelocity]

Can the judge make orders with respect to CS, SS, custody, etc. at a Settlement Conference, or is it like the Case Conference where they simply advise and mediate?

Beyond the practical concerns re: my ability to pay my lawyer, my main concern is that if an order is made giving her spousal, then there is absoluetly no incentive for her to mediate. She'll drag the entire thing out through the courts from then on in. The only leverage I have right now is that she needs spousal pretty much immediately - if that's given to her by the judge then I'm powerless.

Judges can make orders at a Settlement Conference and sometimes do if orders are on consent of the parties or more or less procedural orders. Other orders can be made as well, but if they have a significant effect on the outcome, the Judge will generally make them on a without prejudice basis.

Keep in mind that a Justice that hears a Settlement Conference cannot hear the final adjudication of trial.

[dadtotheend]

Just spoke to my lawyer on all this and it's grim news all around.

Although we doubt she'll get as much as she is asking for, I could still be on the hook for a sizable chunk of SS and it will likely be for a period of at least 3 years. The idea of continuing to pay her to sit on her butt and do nothing for the next 3 years of my life makes me sick to my stomach.

On the plus side, my lawyer thinks she can argue it down to the minimum in my range and she also is hopeful we can get a reduction in the amount of CS I'll be paying, which will in part help lighten the overall load. If she actually gets a job at some point or if I move back out on my own, I may be able to get a reduction as well, but I'll have to go through the courts to do so.

I'll probably have to relent to giving her decision-making powers with regards to the kids as well - at least temporarily until custody is determined. Of course, once SS starts rolling in and with the temp order in hand, the odds that she will grant me joint custody are as slim as the courts granting it to me.

When a spouse has primary residence for the children, it can affect the duration of the spousal support in a way you won't like, the argument being that the kids need their primary residence to be maintained via spousal support in addition to the child support.

You might be well advised to offer a little better than the minimum spousal support so that the judge sees you as being reasonable and therefore doesn't order to you to pay it for as long as the child support.

[About_Time]

Just spoke to my lawyer on all this and it's grim news all around.

Although we doubt she'll get as much as she is asking for, I could still be on the hook for a sizable chunk of SS and it will likely be for a period of at least 3 years. The idea of continuing to pay her to sit on her butt and do nothing for the next 3 years of my life makes me sick to my stomach.

On the plus side, my lawyer thinks she can argue it down to the minimum in my range and she also is hopeful we can get a reduction in the amount of CS I'll be paying, which will in part help lighten the overall load. If she actually gets a job at some point or if I move back out on my own, I may be able to get a reduction as well, but I'll have to go through the courts to do so.

I'll probably have to relent to giving her decision-making powers with regards to the kids as well - at least temporarily until custody is determined. Of course, once SS starts rolling in and with the temp order in hand, the odds that she will grant me joint custody are as slim as the courts granting it to me.

So basically, the only way I'm going to come out of the motion hearing on Friday without being screwed is if she gets hit by a bus on the way in. Hooray for Family Law!

[dadtotheend]

Not sure what will happen at a motion, it's a bit of a roll of the dice, depends on the judge you get.

If a SS and/or a CS support order is made, it will be difficult to change later as a status quo will arise. You may want to counter offer a SS amount and time expiry that will give the judge something to hang his/her hat on, as opposed to just the other side's request. Consult your lawyer on amount and time horizon.

[About_Time]

We only today got some financial disclosure from the ex and we have next to nothing from the bio dad, but I'm being dragged back to court Friday for this motion anyhow. She wants FULL child support from both me AND the bio dad (double dipping on support for my son) plus over $700/mth in spousal support.

Would a judge even resolve this matter given the unecessarily short time frame to formulate a response and lack of full disclosure? My assumption is that we will ask for and be granted an adjournment, meaning more wasted legal fees for me.

[About_Time]

Turned out to be a moot point in some ways, because she is apparently filing a motion to get spousal and child support decided ASAP... like in 10 days. I still haven't seen her financial disclosure or that of the bio dad, so I'm hoping the judge won't just order something in that short of a time frame and under those conditions.

She keeps talking the talk about negotation, but she isn't walking the walk. I think at this point it's fair to assume that she's just going to drag everything through the court.