Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in orders

Parental Alienation Syndrome, Malicious Mother Syndrome, dealing with the ex, and various other non-legal concerns throughout the process.

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Fatheroffour » Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:55 am

Opposite sex (gender) of who?

It seems that if you had a daughter you would be in contempt if she has a sleepover with her female friends.

Among other things.
Everyone lies.
User avatar
Fatheroffour
Moderator
 
Posts: 26858
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:37 am
Location: Top of the world

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Trevor » Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:11 pm

The language in wcd's clauses seem geared to rein in the X's post marital behavior by putting in direct jeopardy her alimony if she chose to shack up...first documented instance and the 9-month clock starts ticking toward wcd's "emancipation." That must've been an interesting hearing. [Rhet.]
Dual Parenting, not Duel Parenting.
Trevor
Moderator
 
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:55 pm

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby BartSimpson » Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:20 pm

How does one become dis-engaged? Does giving the ring back start the clock all over?
"I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.”
― my neighbor Jack
User avatar
BartSimpson
10K Club
 
Posts: 12558
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Fatheroffour » Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:23 pm

"The parties agree that if a individual of the opposite sex stays overnight with a parent while the child are in care of that parent, then for the purpose to this agreement they are considered "engaged".



So if your daughter has a sleepover then you are engaged to the child?

What if the parents object?
Everyone lies.
User avatar
Fatheroffour
Moderator
 
Posts: 26858
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:37 am
Location: Top of the world

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Trevor » Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:24 pm

That depends if the child sleeps with the parent or the other children, I guess.
Dual Parenting, not Duel Parenting.
Trevor
Moderator
 
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:55 pm

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Fatheroffour » Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:30 pm

I'm guessing that the terminology won't stand up to either judicial or practical scrutiny.

You can't just plow along and change legal terminology to fit your desires. "For the purposes of this agreement "Married" means whatever I decide I want it to mean, "Engaged" means whatever I want it to mean and "Married" = "Engaged".
Everyone lies.
User avatar
Fatheroffour
Moderator
 
Posts: 26858
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:37 am
Location: Top of the world

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby wcd9973 » Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:35 pm

You guys crack me up!

Your probably right. It MIGHT not stand up in court - BUT....because the penalties are laid out it would have a chance (When written - That was my lawyers goal. That since Alimony is being agreed to by us and not mandated by a judge, that we could get away with laying out the terms and the conditions).

It is great as a threat...only came up once. Last year she asked if her boyfriend could come with her and the kids on a vacation to a cabin and stay overnight. I said "Sure...No problem what so ever! Are you having a engagement party? Want me to wait the 9 months to send you a gift or just send it now?"

She didn't bring him.

and your right - technically it stops are kids (Boy and girl) from having a sleep over!! Hmmmm....wonder if I can try to get out of Alimony by encouraging my son to have a sleep over at his moms house! HAHA

Anyway - like I stated ahead of time - I'm a lucky one. We avoid a courtroom hearing (I offered extra alimony, my lawyer wrote the agreement, after some pointed give and take we signed, and after a rough 1st year have been ok and have avoided any major arguments. So I have no reason to suspect that this agreement will ever have to be ruled on). A judge signed off on a agreement that was already signed by both parties. So it never became a factor.
wcd9973
100+ Posts
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 7:57 am

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby wcd9973 » Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:41 pm

Trevor - you are 100% correct! The clause was not agreed to my me to control custody but to free me from Alimony if she was shacking up without me having to go thru all the trouble of finding if he lived there or not (Which, from this place showed me how hard that is).

Bart - The "Dis-engaged" was purpously left out to avoid her from saying "Im engaged today....Now I'm not...Now Im engaged again"

Side note - We were divorced in March 2010. In exchange for the parts I put in there, She put in a rule that said I was not allowed to get remarried until March 2011 (Like I was going to want to rush into THAT again). I agreed without a second thought, because I didn't care. But I also wondered just how enforceable THAT would have been.
wcd9973
100+ Posts
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 7:57 am

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Trevor » Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:46 pm

Amazing what stuff people will stick into a divorce decree to control the other party after the marriage is dissolved.
Dual Parenting, not Duel Parenting.
Trevor
Moderator
 
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:55 pm

Re: Overnight "guests" and how courts view this clause in or

Postby Fatheroffour » Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:56 pm

I get a kick out of reading the knots people sometimes tie themselves into.

wcd's is pretty good. If I were living under his decree I would now be engaged to about half a dozen 10-11 year old girls. I wouldn't feel real good about that.

We went through some of this during mediation and if you keep pointing out the flaws in the wording the clause gets more and more specific until it's virtually unrecognizable and so specific that it's worthless.

Like a no alcohol clause. What about if it's in medicine or under a doctors recommendation? Well, that's ok. Boom, the whole clause is worthless.
Everyone lies.
User avatar
Fatheroffour
Moderator
 
Posts: 26858
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:37 am
Location: Top of the world

Previous Next

Return to Parenting - Child Custody Forum and Child Support Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 25 guests