Court again
So after all the baloney with The Ex changing the date on the stipulation, we finally had court. Our Attorney told me to email Attorney 4 and make a proposal in an attempt to settle this faster than having everyone testify.
Attorney 4 emails Our Attorney well after hours, says she is not going to communicate with me because "[Our Attorney] is the attorney of record; not her." (I think Attorney 4 is beginning to get irritable because she feels very foolish knowing I understand her client's case better than either one of them does.) Attorney 4 goes on to complain that Our Attorney sent a subpoena to The Ex's employer and that Attorney 4 was not given notice; Attorney 4 says she was never asked for updated paystubs and writes, "Had I been asked I would of provided them." (That should read, "I would HAVE provided them," not "I would of provided them." I cannot fathom how this woman earns the type of money that she does.) Attorney 4 makes a catty comment about providing proof of Husband's income and says he "conveniently" didn't provide anything at our last child support hearing (She's right, he didn't. The judge did not ask for it, either. The judge said he was going to use Husband's income based on the last support order and never once asked how much Husband was earning.) Attorney 4 continues, "Why [Husband] would want to do anything that might hamper [The Ex’s] ability to be hired on permanently is beyond me." (I have no idea what she means by this. Husband has never done anything to hamper The Ex's ability to get or keep a job.) Attorney 4 says this is a second occurrence of Our Attorney sending a subpoena without providing notice; Attorney 4 says she is going to consult with The Ex to see if she "wants to take any formal action." (I really, really, really have absolutely no clue why this woman is so angry. I don't know if we caught her in the middle of PMS but she is unbelievably bitter in this email.)
Our Attorney emails back and says the subpoena was sent requesting The Ex's employer appear as a witness, who was excused upon receipt of the documents that would have been supplied for the hearing (So take all the "formal action" you want - we didn't do anything wrong. Why are you mad that I received documents you claimed you were going to provide anyway?) Our Attorney reminds Attorney 4 that we made a reasonable settlement offer and they changed the date on it. Our Attorney closes with, "[My name] is my assistant. I have spoken with your assistant." (And that is how you bitch-slap someone by email ;) )
We get to court; The Ex has both of her parents there. Husband testifies; I'm fairly sure I caught The Ex's mom rolling her eyes at him while he was answering questions. During cross-examination, Attorney 4 starts to ask a question and interrupts herself with, "And I'd ask that you please not look at your wife." Husband says he can do whatever he wants; Our Attorney says that's not appropriate for Attorney 4 to say that; Attorney 4 accuses me of "prompting" from the gallery; Husband rolls through the question and the commissioner does nothing.
Ultimately, it went pretty well. The commissioner only back-dated support to increase based on when we filed, not from when The Ex began full-time work. He did not feel that The Ex needed to contribute to school lunches, although he did find her in contempt for failure to pay for the rest of the variable expenses; he added the balance of $600+ to her child support obligation and also ordered The Ex to pay us an additional $100 for attorney fees.
Here's the kicker: The Ex is now paying twice what she would have paid, had she just signed the stipulation we sent them in March. By trying to screw us out of $153 for two months, she's going to pay almost $815 more every year in addition to paying her attorney's fees and being found in contempt for not supporting her kids. Boy oh boy, did she show us!
Attorney 4 emails Our Attorney well after hours, says she is not going to communicate with me because "[Our Attorney] is the attorney of record; not her." (I think Attorney 4 is beginning to get irritable because she feels very foolish knowing I understand her client's case better than either one of them does.) Attorney 4 goes on to complain that Our Attorney sent a subpoena to The Ex's employer and that Attorney 4 was not given notice; Attorney 4 says she was never asked for updated paystubs and writes, "Had I been asked I would of provided them." (That should read, "I would HAVE provided them," not "I would of provided them." I cannot fathom how this woman earns the type of money that she does.) Attorney 4 makes a catty comment about providing proof of Husband's income and says he "conveniently" didn't provide anything at our last child support hearing (She's right, he didn't. The judge did not ask for it, either. The judge said he was going to use Husband's income based on the last support order and never once asked how much Husband was earning.) Attorney 4 continues, "Why [Husband] would want to do anything that might hamper [The Ex’s] ability to be hired on permanently is beyond me." (I have no idea what she means by this. Husband has never done anything to hamper The Ex's ability to get or keep a job.) Attorney 4 says this is a second occurrence of Our Attorney sending a subpoena without providing notice; Attorney 4 says she is going to consult with The Ex to see if she "wants to take any formal action." (I really, really, really have absolutely no clue why this woman is so angry. I don't know if we caught her in the middle of PMS but she is unbelievably bitter in this email.)
Our Attorney emails back and says the subpoena was sent requesting The Ex's employer appear as a witness, who was excused upon receipt of the documents that would have been supplied for the hearing (So take all the "formal action" you want - we didn't do anything wrong. Why are you mad that I received documents you claimed you were going to provide anyway?) Our Attorney reminds Attorney 4 that we made a reasonable settlement offer and they changed the date on it. Our Attorney closes with, "[My name] is my assistant. I have spoken with your assistant." (And that is how you bitch-slap someone by email ;) )
We get to court; The Ex has both of her parents there. Husband testifies; I'm fairly sure I caught The Ex's mom rolling her eyes at him while he was answering questions. During cross-examination, Attorney 4 starts to ask a question and interrupts herself with, "And I'd ask that you please not look at your wife." Husband says he can do whatever he wants; Our Attorney says that's not appropriate for Attorney 4 to say that; Attorney 4 accuses me of "prompting" from the gallery; Husband rolls through the question and the commissioner does nothing.
Ultimately, it went pretty well. The commissioner only back-dated support to increase based on when we filed, not from when The Ex began full-time work. He did not feel that The Ex needed to contribute to school lunches, although he did find her in contempt for failure to pay for the rest of the variable expenses; he added the balance of $600+ to her child support obligation and also ordered The Ex to pay us an additional $100 for attorney fees.
Here's the kicker: The Ex is now paying twice what she would have paid, had she just signed the stipulation we sent them in March. By trying to screw us out of $153 for two months, she's going to pay almost $815 more every year in addition to paying her attorney's fees and being found in contempt for not supporting her kids. Boy oh boy, did she show us!
Comments
Post a Comment