Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Case Conference briefs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by NBDad View Post
    Worthy of a single bullet point response.

    something along the lines of:

    "Bio-child A is currently enrolled in full time studies @ $postsecondary, Bio-child B is currently enrolled in full time studies @ $postsecondary. Being enrolled in full time studies at a post-secondary institution would meet the standard legal definition of a "child of the marriage" and as such they are entitled to receive support until they are no longer "children of the marriage." As such, Bio-Child A and B continue to receive support.
    I know this (child of the marriage) while they're enrolled in univ. the opposing counsel is aware of this too I'm sure but why is she adamant that I produce "proof"

    Comment


    • #17
      Vexatious litigant

      Originally posted by Rioe View Post
      I thought vexatious litigant was more like someone who keeps coming back to court for the same thing over and over, or variations on the same thing. With the intent to be, you know, vexing.
      That is exactly what it is.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by arabian View Post
        That is exactly what it is.
        Arabian..see nbdads post above!! It pretty well describes (some key points anyways) what I'm kinda thinking I'm dealing with

        Comment


        • #19
          I know this (child of the marriage) while they're enrolled in univ. the opposing counsel is aware of this too I'm sure but why is she adamant that I produce "proof"
          Because she wants to be a pain in your ass. Honestly she's showing you her cards...they likely plan on arguing that you shouldn't be paying, ergo you have more money to pay HER.

          Simply attach a copy of your current order re: bio-children, and use the clause outlined above. Or lump it with the previous one...ie. the not relevant thing.

          Either or.

          Probably putting it in there so they can "negotiate it away" and in exchange ask for more spousal.

          Comment


          • #20
            NBdad..how would u like an all paid expense trip out to Ontario for a week??? I'd like ur help!!
            Not sure that would fly with the wife But if you need help in responding to some of the other fluff, I'm more than happy to try. I tend to be fairly good at being able to articulate stuff in writing.

            Comment


            • #21
              yes and what you want to do is have the opposing party be ordered to post a bond for costs (a sort of damage deposit) of several thousand dollars, prior to any new motions being heard.

              I agree that short responses are important. To the 29 pages you can probably simply reply "irrelevant" if you feel the need to respond at all. That is what my lawyer has done and we have been successful each and every time.

              Comment

              Our Divorce Forums
              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
              Working...
              X