quote:
Originally posted by unclegus:
Although this is not the courts decision, and I understand that all Lawyers are going to ask for more than they know they will get, I find it disturbing that they can expect him to provide alimony for her to live at the same level as when they were together. If he were to do that, he could not live at the same level as before the divorce.
I know there probably is no way to fairly decide exactly just what half is, It just seems all divorces wind up with one of the two loosing more than the other?
After a divorce, no one is going to have the same standard of living as they did when they were married. That "legalese" language is very standard and it does not mean that she wanted another quarter of a million dollar house and all that. It means that she wanted the courts to see that he made the lion's share of the money and she would be much worse off financially than he would be after the divorce. She was asking the courts to remedy that by ordering him to pay alimony.
And a lot of lawyers take the approach that they will ask for everything and anything and be happy if the judge gives them most of what they want. Maybe that was what her attorney was doing. Maybe he said "we'll ask for half the house + half the retirement + alimony and then if we just get half the house or half the retirement + alimony we'll say OK".
And yes, divorces are hardly ever equal. It just isn't possible to assign an actual value to everything.
Ron, I ordered you one of those robot women. Watch for her to be arriving in the mail any day now.
I think her name is Rosie.