Friday, April 14, 2006

Her response to my papers

I just got my ex-wife's response to my court papers. Here is one of her main points:

Respondent's payment during their first year of marriage of Petitioner's law school loans was a gift. This payment was never made conditional upon Petitioner's working and paying off this debt to the community's benefit. Petitioner was caring for their baby and continued to care for their children full time for the next seven years. Petitioner did not pursue a career in law, nor did she have plans to do so anytime in the near future. Petitioner's full time job was to care for the children. Had Petitioner not been caring for these children, over a span of seven years, Respondent would have had to pay at least this amount and much more for day care, and a full time nanny.

Furthermore, Respondent and the community benefited from Petitioner's law degree. Respondent had been involved in several court battles throughout their marriage, both in Federal court and in the Santa Cruz court system. Respondent utilized Petitioner's legal skills throughout these battles; Petitioner was a law clerk, a legal secretary, and an errand girl for Respondent. Petitioner was never compensated for these services.
So I got the benefit of her law school education because I got some legal advice from her, and if she had refused to help take care of the kids, then I would have had to hire a nanny, and that would have cost more than her law school.

This is all intended to justify me paying her lawyer big bucks in order to write up complaints about how I took care of the kids during our marriage.

No comments: