Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help

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

  • #16
    Yes well her lawyer probably has his eye on some sort of security. One can go bankrupt and maintain a certain amount of equity in a house.... Lawyers don't work for free and most would run away if they thought for one minute they wouldn't get paid (either you, your ex or both of you have employment).

    Today is only Monday. Sometimes lawyers need a few days to meet with their clients and respond to settlement offers.

    Hope you hear something soon. The waiting is excruciatingly stressful. Good luck.

    Comment


    • #17
      She's already had the court order the house be sold out from under the kids and I, after I paid down the mortgage for two years. The net proceeds are pitiful, so, no house equity. She has secure, unionized, and very high paying employment as a teacher. I've had to take what I could get for jobs after following her to a market with little demand for my skills.

      I think opposing counsel realizes that the only real hope for his fees getting paid is through her employment, since a costs award against me won't be fruitful, especially since it such will be accompanied by unpayable child support as well.

      I've gotten a written reply from this lawyer, saying his client is undecided about settling and offering to sever the equalization and do an Agreement on just that.

      I really think he is reluctant to continue with the trial, probably because his unpaid fees are more than six digits already, and will triple if the trial goes another two weeks.

      Comment


      • #18
        Protect Costs

        Costs are what motivates litigants to continue fighting.

        Some reasons Costs are awarded the way they are is because of the COMPLEXITY of the case (waste of Court time for simple cases with stubborn people) and the reasonableness or unreasonableness of a party (either winning or losing party)

        Where there any settlement offers.

        Lots of people sit in that witness box and roll there eyes over answering hours of questions that go nowhere KNOWING there lawyer is being paid 300-500/hr. (Breaks anybody down)

        OP lawyer KNOWS his clients finances and knows the strength of his/her case and what his client can be TAPPED for (the bill)

        I imagine OP lawyer see's whats ahead going forward (unpaid)..but be careful on being the one responsible for being stuck (stubborn) on just one item as a tactic in avoiding the "unreasonable" label.

        Both parties have over 3 days developed a personal relationship with the Judge, don't be seen as letting the Judge down.

        There could be a creative way to solve the one item....or eat some crap to stick EX with the lawyer bill.

        Also after Trial is over and the Order is done ......you/ex can try making it work but your also entitled to a new Application and Trial 6 months after this Trial is history.

        If your a Self Rep you learned a TON.....EX learned nothing (going forward.)

        Just some advice.
        Last edited by MrToronto; 05-06-2015, 10:50 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Thanks. There's been Offers to Settle going both ways since long before the trial started. It was my overture in the middle of cross examining her, five days into the trial, that caused the potential Settlement to be negotiated last Friday.

          The one and only thing I haven't budged on is joint custody - her Application was for sole custody of all three of our children. The potential Settlement even allows her "primary residence" status, despite there being no child support payable. I'm not sure of the hidden legal dangers with that, though.

          I suspect her difficulty with deciding whether to agree to the settlement is partly based on the fact that I haven't finished cross-examining her yet, so she can't talk to her lawyer about how much of a malevolent liar my cross-examination has exposed her as being thus far.

          She probably still believes her delusions that I suddenly became a monster and that she is therefore perfectly entitled to seize, withhold, and alienate the children while denying them the counseling and psychiatric care that I've tried to arrange.

          Anyway, the unbelievably stressful waiting-and-seeing continues.

          Comment


          • #20
            There's no settlement. The ex is so desperate to prevent a return to equal parenthood that she is willing to continue with a trial that is now estimated to take six weeks instead of two. I'm still cross-examining her, but the court room furniture had to be rearranged because I was "too close to her".

            Comment


            • #21
              So you're looking at a 6 week trial - how come so long? Does your ex have a lawyer? Why is it taking so many days to cross examine your ex? Did you not settle ANYTHING prior to trial in agreement of facts?

              Having to re-arrange courtroom furniture doesn't sound very good - sounds like your situation is quintessential "high conflict" for sure.

              Who can afford a 6 week trial anyhow?

              Comment


              • #22
                She's got a premium-priced lawyer, who she owes six figures to already. I've had to self-represent for a long long time.

                The only thing preventing settlement is her refusal to accept equal parenting time. I've already agreed to no support (she makes far more than I do). She's so desperate to prevent equal parenting time, that she's willing to incur the legal fees for another month of trial.

                It is so obvious to me that this is being driven by a mental health issue that should be dealt with outside the court.

                Comment


                • #23
                  I'm confused - you said the sticking point is that she doesn't want you to have equal parenting time, but you also said you'd made an offer to her which gave her primary residence with the kids which she turned down. If she had primary residence, she'd have more than equal time with the kids which is what she wants, right?

                  Also I don't think it's wise to make an offer with no child support payable - CS is the right of the children, and shouldn't be used as a bargaining point. The only exceptions I am aware of are where the cost of exercising access by a non-resident parent is extremely high (e.g. residential parent moved across country). You and your ex might agree privately to reduce the amount of money that changes hands, but the children's entitlement to full child support should be in your order, or it's unlikely to get signed.

                  Of course, I have not been to court so I could be wrong on this.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I consulted with a lawyer who told me that "primary residency" is meaningless if time is equally shared. It is merely a label, which I conceded to assuage her poor self-esteem which is driving everything.

                    While CS may be the right of the children, under an equal parenting regime she'd only have to pay a few hundred in offset CS. Having to pay this support flies in the face of her sense of entitlement, and is a driving factor behind her withholding of the children.

                    None of the lawyers have had any issue with with no child support offers, they have gone both ways.

                    I figured agreeing to no CS was a small price to pay to get her to release her death-grip on my younger two children. Unfortunately it seems it is not sufficient.

                    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