|
waps
|
|
(recently joined)
|
|
09/29/07 10:36 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
I have a home with my business in it. I pay all the bills and the mortgage at that residence. In June of 07. I moved my clothes into my fiance' home and spend nights there at his house. I do not contribute any money towards his bills or mortgage. The ex who I receive maintenence from, has filed to eliminate the maintenence claiming cohabitation. Where do I stand on this matter.
|
|
googledad
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/29/07 10:39 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
What does your court order say in regards to grounds for terminating maintenance ? Usually maintaining separate residences is enough to disprove cohabitation .
|
|
Relayer
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/29/07 10:40 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
I have a home with my business in it. I pay all the bills and the mortgage at that residence. In June of 07. I moved my clothes into my fiance' home and spend nights there at his house. I do not contribute any money towards his bills or mortgage. The ex who I receive maintenence from, has filed to eliminate the maintenence claiming cohabitation. Where do I stand on this matter.
So you want to defraud your ex?
|
|
Goodmom
|
|
(Pooh-Bah)
|
|
09/29/07 10:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
I have a home with my business in it. I pay all the bills and the mortgage at that residence. In June of 07. I moved my clothes into my fiance' home and spend nights there at his house. I do not contribute any money towards his bills or mortgage. The ex who I receive maintenence from, has filed to eliminate the maintenence claiming cohabitation. Where do I stand on this matter.
Seems to me that you are cohabitating. And if the court order says that spousal support stops upon cohabitation, then the payments will stop.
|
|
Miranda
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/29/07 01:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
You are cohabitating, so what is the question? Where do you stand? Where do you think you stand?
|
|
waps
|
|
(recently joined)
|
|
09/30/07 02:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
My divorce decree just states that maintenence is indefinite. There are no statements for termination.
Also, what does it take to prove cohabitation?
|
|
Relayer
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/30/07 03:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
My divorce decree just states that maintenence is indefinite. There are no statements for termination.
Also, what does it take to prove cohabitation?
Which means it can be terminated if statute says it can be for cohabitation.
Documented evidence that you spend a majority of your nights there is enough.
Or your testimony if questioned, unless you plan on commiting perjury. And then if proven, not only does support end, you face perjury and fraud charges.
|
|
emilar
|
|
(enthusiast)
|
|
09/30/07 06:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Why would you want to worry about it? If you got a fiance and you spend nights with him - let your ex off the hook. Unless you are not too sure about the fiance- if thats the case move your stuff back home before it's too late. Sounds like your ex has all the proof he needs or he wouldn't have filed.
|
|
googledad
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/30/07 09:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
My divorce decree just states that maintenence is indefinite. There are no statements for termination.
Also, what does it take to prove cohabitation?
Cohabitation isn't grounds for termination of maintenance in Wisconsin but sometimes can be used to modify the amount of the award as a change in circumstances .
The definition of "cohabitation" varies widely in different locations. Some courts have held that "cohabitation" means people living together and sharing living expenses. Other courts require a marital, conjugal relationship.
|
|
Relayer
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/30/07 10:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
My divorce decree just states that maintenence is indefinite. There are no statements for termination.
Also, what does it take to prove cohabitation?
Cohabitation isn't grounds for termination of maintenance in Wisconsin but sometimes can be used to modify the amount of the award as a change in circumstances .
The definition of "cohabitation" varies widely in different locations. Some courts have held that "cohabitation" means people living together and sharing living expenses. Other courts require a marital, conjugal relationship.
Staute does not but caselaw does support it if "the cohabitation enhances the maintenance recipient's financial condition, and whether the cohabitors have fashioned their financial relationship to prevent reduced maintenance".
In this OP case, as any appeals or court will find, her financial condition was certainly enhanced by the relationship, as she now is living somewhere else rent and bill free, thus confirming her original residence is no longer a financial burden to her. It is a burden to her business, but not to her personally any longer. An example would be the difference between owning a car for a business (which can also be driven anywhere, anytime, for any reason) and owning one for "pleasure". Second, she has fashioned her financial relationship as such as to prevent the stopping or reduction of maintenance (again by her own admission)
Any third rate lawyer will be able to argue this and any 4th rate judge would be able to opinion on it.
She will lose on this one. Easily. And I hope she does.
|
|
googledad
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/30/07 11:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
I respectfully disagree . OP said she's still maintaining a separate residence and paying all her own bills ( ie there's no comingling of assets ) . Her financial situation hasn't changed in the least . It would be " nice" if she'd release her ex from the obligation but "nice" isn't a legal standard .
|
|
Relayer
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
09/30/07 11:20 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
I respectfully disagree . OP said she's still maintaining a separate residence and paying all her own bills ( ie there's no comingling of assets ) . Her financial situation hasn't changed in the least . It would be " nice" if she'd release her ex from the obligation but "nice" isn't a legal standard .
LOL..I diagree with your disagree and the judge will disagree with myt diagree with your disagree of my disagree..
As you know, caselaw can go anywhere but she is subsidizing her lifestyle because assets once used to finance her own housing are now totally allocated to her business. Her and the business are legally seperate entities.
Touche' putty cat!
|
|
googledad
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
10/01/07 12:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
OP hasn't chimed in about the exact wording of the decree . Was maintenance ordered or stipulated ? Is it modifiable ?
|
|
Relayer
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
10/01/07 04:12 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
She said "there are no statements for termination" and that it was "indefinate"
|
|
Susanf31
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
10/04/07 04:02 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
As you know, caselaw can go anywhere but she is subsidizing her lifestyle because assets once used to finance her own housing are now totally allocated to her business. Her and the business are legally seperate entities
+++++++
You don't know that she is totally allocating her other residence to her business. She might not be charging it to her business or perhaps only a portion of it to her business.
Cohabitation is extremely HARD to prove. Her ex is wasting his money. She has a home that she pays for and maintains. THere's no way he'll be able to prove co-habitation. Even if he tries, all she has to do is take her clothes and go home for a few nights a week.
|
|
Relayer
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
10/04/07 08:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
Quote:
As you know, caselaw can go anywhere but she is subsidizing her lifestyle because assets once used to finance her own housing are now totally allocated to her business. Her and the business are legally seperate entities
+++++++
You don't know that she is totally allocating her other residence to her business. She might not be charging it to her business or perhaps only a portion of it to her business.
Cohabitation is extremely HARD to prove. Her ex is wasting his money. She has a home that she pays for and maintains. THere's no way he'll be able to prove co-habitation. Even if he tries, all she has to do is take her clothes and go home for a few nights a week.
Exactly what part of the original post are you having trouble comprehending?
|
|
Maury
|
|
(Carpal \'Tunnel)
|
|
10/06/07 12:12 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: WI maintenence and cohabitation
|
|
In Wisconsin, Spousal Support does not automatically terminate on cohabitation. Instead, the court must review the financial circumstances to determine if there is a change in financial circumstances, specifically, financial need.
As stated by the courts of appeals in Wisconsin,mMaintenance determinations are left to the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is an abuse of discretion. LaRocque v. LaRocque, 139 Wis.2d 23, 27, 406 N.W.2d 736, 737 (1987).
Additionally, maintenance payments can be modified only upon a finding of change in the financial circumstances of the parties and not solely on the basis of the receiving spouse's cohabitation with a third party. Van Gorder v. Van Gorder, 110 Wis.2d 188, 199, 327 N.W.2d 674, 679 (1983).
Inother words, if the shared financial responsibilities reduce need, a modification is probable.
Some states hold that cohabitation may form a defacto remarriage and terminate spousal support. Wisconsin is not one of those states.
|