• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Divorce law really screwed this guy.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Wiki gives a list of countries that have extradition treaties with the US, countries that have no extradition treaties but have "diplomatic relations", and then countries that have neither.

Does "diplomatic relations" mean you could get shipped out?
 
WTF at the article. That SUCKS.

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Even her 22-hour a week job at an antique market was proving to be a hardship, Cormier testified, acknowledging that she took a quarter to a half an Advil a few times a week to deal with chronic pain.
Wow, the pain must be unbearable.

WTF...

That's not even a proper dose, unless you are an infant...
 
Originally posted by: dougp
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
I could really see him become suicidal.

Homicidal / Suicidal. I'm surprised that he's not holding this against her enough to consider that.

Exactly. He basically has nothing to live for anymore... his bitch of an ex-wife got it all.
 
Having a penis is considered damning evidence in a divorce case. It's pretty ridiculous. Women want equal rights, but not equal responsibilities.
 
Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Originally posted by: dougp
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
I could really see him become suicidal.

Homicidal / Suicidal. I'm surprised that he's not holding this against her enough to consider that.

Exactly. He basically has nothing to live for anymore... his bitch of an ex-wife got it all.

False,
run off to a country that doesn't extradite... done and done.
 
Originally posted by: zerocool84
With the divorce rate it is at, it's financially irresponsible to get married.

Actually, I'd say that it's financially dangerous to marry someone who doesn't work or has very low income. Alimony will bite you hard in the ass. So will splitting a pension should that come up.
 
Originally posted by: TallBill
Originally posted by: zerocool84
With the divorce rate it is at, it's financially irresponsible to get married.

Actually, I'd say that it's financially dangerous to marry someone who doesn't work or has very low income. Alimony will bite you hard in the ass. So will splitting a pension should that come up.

And half of your 401k if not more. Plus alimony.
 
I still don't get why stuff like this is regulated by the government...

Should these people sort things out themselves about personal issues such a marriage?
 
In a dream world, I could definitely see some Monte Cristo shit happening and all of us sleeping soundly after that.
 
Originally posted by: RaistlinZ
Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
lesson learned: don't get married.

Fixed. Prenups don't mean jack nowadays. Even living together for many years can make you end up forking over cash in some states.

1. Prenups are almost always honored by courts unless there is some overwhelming evidence to invalidate the contract so I don't see why don't mean jack.

2. If anything, putative spouse doctrine provides MORE reason to get married w/ a prenup than just live together.
 
I realize this is in Canada, but Jesus H. Christ in a handbasket. What the fuck?

How does this happen? I mean, how is being forced to support your ex-wife a law? How messed up is that?

If two people decide to separate, splitting your assets is understandable. I don't understand how a monthly payment for support factors into things, sans kids of course.

Can someone explain how this ever came to be law?

😕
 
Originally posted by: Eli
I realize this is in Canada, but Jesus H. Christ in a handbasket. What the fuck?

How does this happen? I mean, how is being forced to support your ex-wife a law? How messed up is that?

If two people decide to separate, splitting your assets is understandable. I don't understand how a monthly payment for support factors into things, sans kids of course.

Can someone explain how this ever came to be law?

😕

Legal system up here is really fucked up. Because they want to be as fair and equitable as they possibily can, they over compensate and screw it up badly.
 
Originally posted by: Cdubneeddeal
Wow, I don't think I'll ever want to get married, especially living in WA where the man gets fucked no matter what.
Is there any literature for this? I am not aware of WA divorce laws.
 
Originally posted by: dr150
Leave the country. End of story.

Many men would end up killing her though.

Those would be my two suggestions. Run, fake identity, change the appearance. Nobody will recognize him if he dyes his hair, puts on 100 pounds and gets a job as a fishing guide in the keys.
 
The dude at work is still fighting his.

He has to pay $1k/month plus child support.

He has to cover his wife's health insurance as well. Recently the court awarded him $15k due to her overbilling him for the insurance.

Problem is the court says he still has to pay the $1k/month, cover her current insurance while she pays back that debt at no interest and just $100 per month.

It's messed up. As long as she doesn't remarry or cohabitate he is on the hook even when he starts Social Security in a couple years. He will never be able to retire.
 
that's why my wife has a virtual bum for an uncle; required divorce payments pretty much would have taken all of his salary so he quit and lives with the parents doing nothing. Hard to collect any money on $0 earned.
 
Back
Top